Immigrants and the Right to Stay

by Joseph H. Carens

A proposal that immigrants in the United States should be offered a path to legalized status. The Obama administration promises to take on comprehensive immigration reform in 2010, setting policymakers to work on legislation that might give the approximately eleven million undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States a path to legalization of status. Commentators have been quick to observe that any such proposal will face intense opposition. Few issues have so divided the country in recent years as immigration. Immigrants and the Right to Stay brings the debate into the realm of public reason. Political theorist Joseph Carens argues that although states have a right to control their borders, the right to deport those who violate immigration laws is not absolute. With time, immigrants develop a moral claim to stay. Emphasizing the moral importance of social membership, and drawing on principles widely recognized in liberal democracies, Carens calls for a rolling amnesty that gives unauthorized migrants a path to regularize their status once they have been settled for a significant period of time. After Carens makes his case, six experts from across the political spectrum respond. Some protest that he goes too far; others say he does not go far enough in protecting the rights of migrants. Several raise competing moral claims and others help us understand how the immigration problem became so large. Carens agrees that no moral claim is absolute, and that, on any complex public issue, principled debate involves weighing competing concerns. But for him the balance falls clearly on the side of amnesty.

Genres: Nonfiction

114 pages, Hardcover

First published September 3, 2010

Reviews

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good quick read. A refresher or an introduction to the root issues involved in the immigration debate. The author's essay is followed by commentary of several other experts in the field so the issues are flushed out even further.

[Fang · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book couldn't in any way be seen as not lucidly written. But I somehow yearned for many many bullet points after reading through it. Guess this is inevitable when you want to fit into a small book (in the case of the Boston Review series, 'small' is physical) a legal topic as complicated as its kind could ever get. It's as if a ppt got lost in a book or something. You struggle both to find the underlying structure of words/logics, and the more sophisticated philosophical underpinnings.

But I do appreciate the effort from both the author and the wonderful Boston Review series. It almost feels morally wrong to be exacting on such a book without which I wouldn't even get to be acquainted with some of the basic moral claims concerning irregular migrants.

Now I'm curious to read on to Joseph Carens's 'real' book: Who Belongs? Immigration, Democracy and Citizenship.

[Trent Smith · Rating 3 out of 5]

Boston Review Books are slim attractive little things but with a decidedly leftist agenda. This is quite obvious from the main essay's use of the term "irregular migrants" to discuss illegal aliens. Immigration is a complex and thorny issue with no clear cut answers on how to deal with the current 11 million illegals in the U.S. However, I tend to reject Carens main moral thrust that says the "most important consideration [when dealing with "irregular migrants"] is the passage of time." Implying, the longer you get away with breaking the law, the greater your claim of legitimacy to remain in the states without any repercussions.

[jenni · Rating 4 out of 5]

a brief and thought-provoking thesis on undocumented immigration written during the Obama years whose main argument forwards an interesting temporal metric on granting amnesty or legality to undocumented migrants whose social membership in a country they are otherwise unauthorized to be in is of highly significant importance in moving forward with policy. follows with a nice forum template where other writers and academics* argue the merits and challenges of this idea.

*except for Carol Swain. Fuck that lady.

[Rachel Notter · Rating 3 out of 5]

The essay while not offering any tangible policy reforms does begin the reader on the road of understanding a progressive view on immigration. Carens sticks solely to moral claims and includes some very powerful, eloquently worded phrases but overall the essay was redundant without offering the solidity I wanted. Inclusion of some differing views such as that of Carol M. Swain was refreshing and though provoking. This is a good starting place to begin to form opinions of one’s own!