A Presumptive Right to Exclude: From Imposed Obligations To A Viable Threshold

Global Politics Review 3 (1):98-108 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
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.
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2021-03-30
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
18 ( #63,363 of 64,072 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #56,425 of 64,072 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.