Migration Rights
This chapter offers a response to papers by Ann Dummett and Paul Weithman, considering migration rights ‘from a natural law perspective’. The chapter offers answers to the questions: Is eviction of squatters from one's house, in the interests of one's children, ‘promoting one's children's interests at the expense of the squatters' interests? Is it wrong to attribute rights to citizens which aliens do not have, or to admit foreigners for work provided they leave after two years and be visited by no family members? Does everyone have the human, natural law right to enter any territory he chooses with a view to living and working peacefully under the laws applicable to citizens? Do our obligations to alleviate the severest disadvantage mean that Rawls's ‘Difference Principle’ is sound? Or does it apply as if the world were one political community? The analogies between property and territory are important, and emigration and immigration are profoundly asymmetrical.
Keywords: citizens, foreigners, property, territory, Rawls, difference principle, emigration, immigration, natural rights
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .