Governance

Governance

Gaja Maestri of Durham University reviews Rights, Deportation, and Detention in the Age of Immigration Control by Tom K. Wong. This book examines what are arguably the most contested and dynamic immigration policies immigration control across 25 immigrant-receiving countries, including the U.S. and...

Read More

Making America 1920 Again? Nativism and US Immigration, Past and Present
This paper surveys the history of nativism in the United States from the late nineteenth century to the present. It compares the current surge in nativism with earlier periods, particularly the decades leading up to the 1920s, when nativism directed against southern and eastern European, Asian, and Mexican migrants led to discriminatory national origin quotas and other legislative restrictions on immigration.

Read More

Creating Cohesive, Coherent Immigration Policy
US immigration policy has serious limitations, particularly when viewed from an economic perspective. Some shortcomings arise from faulty initial design, others from the inability of the system to adapt to changing circumstances. In either case, a reluctance to confront politically difficult decisions is often a contributing factor to the failure to craft laws that can stand the test of time. This paper argues that, as a result, some key aspects of US immigration policy are incoherent and mutually contradictory — new policies are often inconsistent with past policies and undermine their goals. Inconsistency makes policies less effective because participants in the immigration system realize that lawmakers face powerful incentives to revise policies at a later date. It specifically analyzes US policies regarding unauthorized immigration, temporary visas, and humanitarian migrants as examples of incoherence and inconsistency. Lastly, this paper explores key features of an integrated, coherent immigration policy from an economic perspective and how policymakers could better attempt to achieve policy consistency across laws and over time.

Read More

The End of the Deterrence Paradigm? Future Directions for Global Refugee Policy
Asylum lies at the heart of the international refugee protection regime. Yet, today, most states in the developed world implement a range of deterrence measures designed to prevent access to asylum on their territories. With particular attention to Europe’s response to the Syrian refugee crisis, this paper categorizes contemporary deterrence policies. It then questions the sustainability and effectiveness of such policies. A number of deterrence measures do not conform with refugee and human rights law, rendering the refugee protection regime vulnerable to collapse. Finally, this article suggests some ways forward to address these problems. It discusses the partial success of legal challenges to deterrence measures and opportunities for alternative avenues to access protection. Ultimately, however, it argues that the viability of the refugee protection regime requires collective action and international burden-sharing.

Read More

Migration Experts Series | Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen
Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen, Research Director at the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law and adjunct Professor of Law at Aarhus University, discusses his paper, “The End of the Deterrence Paradigm? Future Directions for Global Refugee Policy.” The paper...

Read More

The EU Agreement with Turkey: Does it Jeopardize Refugees’ Rights?
On March 7, 2016, the European Union (EU) and Turkey drew up an agreement for cooperation with the aim of reducing the flow of migrants and refugees — mostly Syrian — crossing the Aegean Sea and taking the Balkan route to arrive in Europe. This essay discusses how the EU-Turkey agreement violates the body of rights and obligations that apply to all EU member states and the international conventions regarding asylum.

Read More