Written by an international team of leading political and legal theory scholars whose writings have contributed to shaping the field, Migration in Political Theory presents seminal new work on the ethics of movement and membership. The volume addresses challenging and under-researched themes on the subject of migration. It debates the question of whether we ought to recognize a human right to immigrate, and whether it might be legitimate to restrict emigration. The authors critically examine criteria for selecting would-be migrants, and for acquiring citizenship. They discuss tensions between the claims of immigrants and existing residents, and tackle questions of migrant worker exploitation and responsibility for refugees. The book illustrates the importance of drawing on the tools of political theory to clarify, criticize, and challenge the current terms of the migration debate.

This volume presents the latest work on the ethics of movement and membership by a team of leading international scholars whose writings have contributed to shaping this field.

Migration dominates contemporary politics across the world, and there has been a corresponding surge in political theorizing about the complex issues that it raises. In a world in which borders seem to be solidifying while the number of displaced people soars, how should we think about the political and ethical implications of human movement across the globe? In this book, Gillian Brock, one of the leading figures in the field, lucidly introduces and explains the important historical, empirical, and normative context necessary to get to grips with the major contemporary debates. She examines issues ranging from the permissibility of controlling borders and the criteria that states can justifiably use to underpin their migration management policies through to questions of integration, inclusion, and resistance to unjust immigration laws. Migration and Political Theory is essential reading for any student, scholar, or general reader who seeks to understand the political theory and ethics of migration and movement in the twenty-first century.

Eminent political theorist Joseph Carens tests the limits of democratic theory in the realm of immigration, arguing that any acceptable immigration policy must be based on moral principles even if it conflicts with the will of the majority.

How should Western democracies respond to the many millions of people who want to settle in their societies? Economists and human rights advocates tend to downplay the considerable cultural and demographic impact of immigration on host societies. Seeking to balance the rights of immigrants with the legitimate concerns of citizens, Strangers in Our Midst brings a bracing dose of realism to this debate. David Miller defends the right of democratic states to control their borders and decide upon the future size, shape, and cultural make-up of their populations. “A cool dissection of some of the main moral issues surrounding immigration and worth reading for its introductory chapter alone. Moreover, unlike many progressive intellectuals, Miller gives due weight to the rights and preferences of existing citizens and does not believe an immigrant has an automatic right to enter a country...Full of balanced judgments and tragic dilemmas.” —David Goodhart, Evening Standard “A lean and judicious defense of national interest...In Miller’s view, controlling immigration is one way for a country to control its public expenditures, and such control is essential to democracy.” —Kelefa Sanneh, New Yorker

All over the world immigration is one of the most urgent political issues, creating tensions and unrest as well as questions of justice and fairness. Academics as well as politicians have been relating to the question of how states should cope with immigrants; but 96% of immigrants end up in cities, and in Europe and the USA, two thirds of the immigrants settle in seven or eight cities. Indeed, most of us encounter with immigrants as city-zens, in our everyday life, rather than as citizens of states. So how should cities integrate immigrants? Should cities be allowed to design their autonomous integration policies? Could they issue visas and permits to immigrants? Should immigrants be granted voting rights in local elections before naturalization? And how do cities think about these issues? What can we learn from cities which are thought to be successful in integrating and assimilating immigrants? Is there a model of integration within the city which is best? The book discusses these questions both empirically and normatively. The book is based on hundreds of in depth discussions of these matters with city dwellers in San Francisco, New York, London, Amsterdam, Berlin, Thessaloniki and Jerusalem. It shifts the discourse on immigration from 'thinking like a state' to 'thinking like a city' .

Who are refugees? Who, if anyone, is responsible for protecting them? What forms should this protection take? In a world of people fleeing from civil wars, state failure, and environmental disasters, these are ethically and politically pressing questions. In this book, David Owen reveals how the contemporary politics of refuge is structured by two rival historical pictures of refugees. In reconstructing this history, he advocates an understanding of refugeehood that moves us beyond our current impasse by distinguishing between what is owed to refugees in general and what is owed to different types of refugee. He provides an account of refugee protection and the forms of international cooperation required to implement it that is responsive to the claims of both refugees and states. At a time when refugee protection is once again prominent on the international agenda, this book offers a guide to understanding the challenges this topic raises and shows why addressing it matters for all of us.