A Presumptive Right to Exclude: From Imposed Obligations To A Viable Threshold
Benedikt Buechel ()
Global Politics Review, 2017, vol. 3, issue 1, 98-108
In “Immigration, Jurisdiction and Exclusion”, Michael Blake develops a new line of argument to defend a state’s presumptive right to exclude would-be immigrants. His account grounds this right on the state as a legal community that must protect and fulfill human rights. Although Blake’s present argument is valid and attractive in being less arbitrary than national membership and in distinguishing different types of immigrants’ claims, I dismiss it for being unsound due to a lack of further elaboration. The reason for my rejection is that there is a fundamental problem with the third premise as it stands now. Therefore, I contend that Blake’s argument cannot justify a general exclusion of well-protected would-be immigrants. However, in the final part, I will try to defend a modified version of Blake’s argument from imposed obligations by contending that a state has a presumptive right to exclude if the human rights obligations that are imposed on its residents go beyond a viable threshold.
Keywords: Immigration; right to exclude; global justice; human rights; Michael Blake. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Y8 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gpr:journl:v:3:y:2017:i:1:p:98-108
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in Global Politics Review from Global Politics Review
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().