Examining Germany and the United States, this book argues that immigration policy in Western democracies is unjust and undemocratic.

"Examines the potential for distrust in an environment of ethnocultural diversity arising from increasing rates of immigration, and its implications for a democratic society. Incorporates democratic theory, multiculturalism theory, and migration theory"--Provided by publisher.

Immigration has emerged as the defining issue of our times. [] The challenge that the immigration issue poses to the future of European democracy is real. Immigration itself is a genuine challenge, but the fundamental challenge that immigration brings to the fore is a domestic one, it is about fundamentally different political visions that cut through the citizenry of Europe's nation states. With that, it becomes critically important how these nation-states, through their democratic institutions, tackle immigration.[] we need both the scholarly analysis and reflection presented in this volume, and we need informed political innovation within and between Europe's nation-states.- from the Foreword by Prof. Dr. Kristian Berg Harpviken, Peace Research Institute Oslo[] In result, Europe, to its series of recent big questions [] had to add another one: migrants stand ante portas and what to do with them?[] We have chosen to look at the extent to which the past, the present and the future of irregular migration to Europe relates to the foundational values and principles on which Europe has been built, namely democracy, the rule of law (Rechtsstaat) and the respect for fundamental rights. We focus on those people who seek in Europe various forms of help, motivated by war or other injustices in the places where they come from.[] the main aim of our book was to join the voluminous professional and academic literature on migration and to offer a few modest suggestion in which direction Europe should go whenever irregular migrants stand ante portas.- from the Preface by the EditorsThis is a timely and elaborate volume interested in the question to what extent the challenge of irregular migration poses a challenge to democracy. The authors approach this issue from different ethical, legal and political angles. They do not shy away from developing concrete recommendations as to what the European Union could do when faced with migratory pressures. Overall, therefore, a highly recommendable contribution.- Prof. Dr. Florian Trauner, Vrije Universiteit Brusse

The fight over immigration reform and immigrants’ rights in the U.S. has been marked by sharp swings in both public sentiment and official enforcement. In 2006, millions of Latino immigrants joined protests for immigration reform. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, a policy granting work permits and protection from deportation to undocumented immigrants who entered the country before age 16, was enacted in 2012, despite a sharp increase in deportations during the Bush and Obama administrations. The 2016 election of Donald J. Trump prompted a surge in anti-immigrant sentiment which threatened DACA and other progressive immigration policies. In Holding Fast, political scientists James McCann and Michael Jones-Correa investigate whether and how these recent shifts have affected political attitudes and civic participation among Latino immigrants. ​ Holding Fast draws largely from a yearlong survey of Latino immigrants, including both citizens and noncitizens, conducted before and after the 2016 election. The survey gauges immigrants’ attitudes about the direction of the country and the emotional underpinnings of their political involvement. While survey respondents expressed pessimism about the direction of the United States following the 2016 election, there was no evidence of their withdrawal from civic life. Instead, immigrants demonstrated remarkable resilience in their political engagement, and their ties to America remained robust. McCann and Jones-Correa examine Latino immigrants’ trust in government as well as their economic concerns and fears surrounding possible deportations of family members and friends. They find that Latino immigrants who were concerned about the likelihood of deportation were more likely to express a lack of trust in government. Concerns about personal finances were less salient. Disenchantment with the U.S. government did not differ based on citizenship status, length of stay in America, or residence in immigrant-friendly states. Foreign-born Latinos who are naturalized citizens shared similar sentiments to those with fewer political rights, and immigrants in California, for example, express views similar to those in Texas. Addressing the potential influence immigrant voters may wield in in the coming election, the authors point to signs that the turnout rate for naturalized Latino immigrant may be higher than that for Latinos born in the United States. The authors further underscore the importance of the parties' platforms and policies, noting the still-tenuous nature of Latino immigrants’ affiliations with the Democratic Party. Holding Fast outlines the complex political situation in which Latino immigrants find themselves today. Despite well-founded feelings of anger, fear, and skepticism, in general they maintain an abiding faith in the promise of American democracy. This book provides a comprehensive account of Latino immigrants’ political opinions and a nuanced, thoughtful outlook on the future of Latino civic participation. It will be an important contribution to scholarly work on civic engagement and immigrant integration.

As far as immigration theory is concerned, the attempt to reconcile concern for all persons with the reality of state boundaries and exclusionary policies has proved difficult within the limits of normative liberal political philosophy. However, the realpolitik of migration in today’s environment forces a major paradigm shift. We must move beyond standard debates between those who argue for more open borders and those who argue for more closed borders. This book aims to show that a realistic utopia of political theory of immigration is possible, but argues that to do so we must focus on expanding the boundaries of what are familiar normative positions in political theory. Theorists must better inform themselves of the concrete challenges facing migration policies: statelessness, brain drain, migrant rights, asylum policies, migrant detention practices, climate refugees, etc. We must ask: what is the best we can and ought to wish for in the face of these difficult migration challenges. Blake, Carens, and Cole offer pieces that outline the major normative questions in the political theory of immigration. The positions these scholars outline are challenged by the pieces contributed by Lister, Ottonelli, Torresi, Sager, and Silverman. These latter pieces force the reformulation of the central positions in normative political theory of immigration. This book was originally published as a special issue of Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy.

While immigration embodies America’s rhetorical commitment to democracy, it also showcases abysmal failures in democratic practice. Koulish examines these failures in terms of excessive executive powers circumventing the constitution, privatization, and right-wing subversion of local democracy.

When Martin Luther King Jr. argued on behalf of civil rights he was told that he was "too soon." Today, those demanding reparations for slavery are told they are "too late." What time is it? Or perhaps the appropriate question is: whose time is it? These questions point to a phenomenon of segregated time: how a range of political subjects are viewed as occupants of different time zones, how experiences of time diverge across peoples, and how these divergent temporal spheres are mutually entwined in ways that serve the interests of white supremacy. In Segregated Time, P.J. Brendese takes a time-sensitive approach to race as it pertains to the acceleration of human disposability, dynamic identity formation, and the production and allocation of social and economic goods. Although typically conceived in terms of space, Brendese argues that racial segregation and inequality are also sustained through impositions on human time. Drawing on a range of Africana, Latinx, and Indigenous political thought, Brendese demonstrates the way in which time is weaponized against people of color and advances a theory of "white time" as a possessive, acquisitive, colonizing force. The chapters explore how migration politics involves temporal borders, how the extended lifetimes of some are built on the foreshortened lives of others, how racial stigma conveys debt and "subprime time," and how whiteness functions as a store of credit through time. In this innovative inquiry into contemporary orders of time and race, Segregated Time examines who is regarded as behind the times, who is cast out of time through racial violence, who "does time" in the prison system, and the racial divides of lives on borrowed time in an epoch of climate catastrophe.