Jeune Street

In a reply to an article in the Boston Review by philosopher Joseph Carens, Arash Abizadeh asks whether states have a moral duty to open their borders to foreigners:

Carens argues that when human beings reside in a society for a length of time, they incur a vast array of social ties comprising “their deepest human connections”: they develop friendships, family, and emotional attachments; even their personalities are molded by the society. These social ties are morally significant because they comprise a “fundamental human interest.” They impose a moral duty on the state because they are so vulnerable to the state’s exercise of power. Thus Carens seems to apply the following principle: if someone’s fundamental interests are vulnerable to the exercise of state power, then the state is morally obliged to take those interests into account in how it exercises power over her, even if the person is a noncitizen. [...]

Consider the case of Niloufar Folani. All of her family and friends live in Iran, and she has been socialized there for the first 21 years of her life. Yet, as a woman, her legal protections against violence by men are precarious. And, as a Bahá’í, she cannot freely practice her religion or attend university. Under the country’s constitution, she is a legal nonperson. She has learned French, and wishes to migrate to Quebec, in search of personal security, education, and religious freedom. Her fundamental interests are at stake, more fundamental to her than her existing social ties. If the state is obliged by fundamental human interests, regardless of citizenship, then what distinguishes Folani from Miguel Sanchez, the extra-legal migrant discussed by Carens? Why should the United States offer residency to Sanchez but Canada refuse Folani?

I’m with Arash. The moral underpinning of border control looks increasingly dubious the longer you look at it. Many states practice what Carens advocates: periodically they extend an amnesty to undocumented migrants and grant them residency rights that put them on the path to citizenship. The US is currently fooling itself by allowing more than 12 million undocumented workers to continue supporting its economy (94% are employed, and most pay taxes) without giving them any rights to social and political participation. Once we accept that undocumented workers should be extended citizenship rights, our techniques of border control seem less and less legitimate.

And that’s before we even talk about global inequality and wage disparities between rich and poor countries.