Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Stripping Citizenship: Does Membership Have its (Moral) Privileges?Sahar Akhtar - 2017 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 95 (3):419-434.
    If states have the moral authority to decide their memberships by denying citizenship, I argue that they may also strip citizenship, from law-abiding members, for the same reasons. The only real difference is that when states revoke citizenship they may need to compensate people for their prior contributions, but that is not unlike what frequently occurs in divorce. Once just termination rules are established, stripping citizenship could become, like divorce, an everyday event. Partly because of this implication, we should reject (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Territorial Exclusion: An Argument Against Closed Borders.Daniel Weltman - 2021 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 19 (3):257-90.
    Supporters of open borders sometimes argue that the state has no pro tanto right to restrict immigration, because such a right would also entail a right to exclude existing citizens for whatever reasons justify excluding immigrants. These arguments can be defeated by suggesting that people have a right to stay put. I present a new form of the exclusion argument against closed borders which escapes this “right to stay put” reply. I do this by describing a kind of exclusion that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Legitimate Exclusion of Would-Be Immigrants: A View From Global Ethics and the Ethics of International Relations.Enrique Camacho Beltran - 2019 - Social Sciences 8 (8):238.
    The debate about justice in immigration seems somehow stagnated given that it seems justice requires both further exclusion and more porous borders. In the face of this, I propose to take a step back and to realize that the general problem of borders—to determine what kind of borders liberal democracies ought to have—gives rise to two particular problems: first, to justify exclusive control over the administration of borders (the problem of legitimacy of borders) and, second, to specify how this control (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Autonomy, Residence, and Return.David Lefkowitz - 2015 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 18 (5):529-546.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Debate: Immigrants and Newcomers by Birth—Do Statist Arguments Imply a Right to Exclude Both?Jan Brezger & Andreas Cassee - 2016 - Journal of Political Philosophy 24 (3):367-378.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Liberalism or Immigration Restrictions, But Not Both.Javier Hidalgo & Christopher Freiman - 2016 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 10 (2):1-22.
    This paper argues for a dilemma: you can accept liberalism or immigration restrictions, but not both. More specifically, the standard arguments for restricting freedom of movement apply equally to textbook liberal freedoms, such as freedom of speech, religion, occupation and reproductive choice. We begin with a sketch of liberalism’s core principles and an argument for why freedom of movement is plausibly on a par with other liberal freedoms. Next we argue that, if a state’s right to self-determination grounds a prima (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations