In for a Penny, or: If You Disapprove of Investment Migration, Why Do You Approve of High-Skilled Migration?

Erez, Lior

doi:10.1515/mopp-2018-0083

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In economics, proposals for “selling” citizenship by states have been around for decades (Becker and Lazear 2013; Borna and Stearns 2002; Simon 1999). More recently, normative political theorists began to address the issue, offering defenses, and more commonly, critiques of the practice (Besson 2019; Erez, 2022; Forthcoming; Hidalgo 2016a; Ip 2020; Shachar 2017; Shachar and Baubock 2014; Shachar and Hirschl 2014; Tanasoca 2018). As the practice currently exists, the state has a monopoly on “selling,” and indeed, on “producing” the commodity which is citizenship.…”

Section: Selling Citizenship By the State And By Individualsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not Yours to Sell: The Case Against Private Citizenship Markets

Erez

2022

Political Research Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Should it be permissible for individuals to sell their own citizenship? In brief: no. Against recent defenses of the idea of private citizenship markets, I argue that these markets cannot be legitimately established. First, I examine existing arguments in the literature in support of such markets, and argue that they do not present sufficient reasons for justifying the establishment of private citizenship markets. Second, I argue that the very idea of private citizenship markets is a non-starter, as the privatization of citizenship allocation undermines the justification for the collective right to exclude from membership. As a result, the case for private citizenship markets fails. Finally, I consider some possible objections to my argument and potential implications of it beyond the case of private citizenship markets.

show abstract

Section: Selling Citizenship By the State And By Individualsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not Yours to Sell: The Case Against Private Citizenship Markets

Erez

2022

Political Research Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For an argument against skill-based criteria, see Lim (2019). For disability, wealth and other criteria, see Erez (2019), MacKay (2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Border-Crossing: Immigration Law, Racism and Justified Resistance

Aitchison

2021

Political Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aside from the case of refugees under international law, are non-citizen outsiders morally justified in unlawfully entering another state? Recent answers to this question, based on a purported right of necessity or civil disobedience, exclude many cases of justified border-crossing and fail to account for its distinctive political character. I argue that in certain non-humanitarian cases, unlawful border-crossing involves the exercise of a remedial moral right to resist the illegitimate exercise of coercive power. The case accepts, for the sake of argument, two conventional assumptions among defenders of immigration restrictions: that states have a ‘right to exclude’ and that migrants have a prima facie duty to respect borders. Nonetheless, where immigration law is racist or otherwise discriminatory, it violates the egalitarian standards at the core of any authority it can plausibly claim over outsiders. In such cases, it may be resisted even where the law is facially non-discriminatory.

show abstract

Self-Determination and the Limits on the Right to Include

Erez,

Banai

2024

Political Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

States’ right to exclude prospective members is the subject of a fierce debate in political theory, but the right to include has received relatively little scholarly attention. To address this lacuna, we examine the puzzle of permissible inclusion: when may states confer citizenship on individuals they have no prior obligation to include? We first clarify why permissible inclusion is a puzzle, then proceed to a normative evaluation of this practice and its limits. We investigate self-determination – a dominant principle in theories of the right to exclude – as a normative ground for limits on the right to include. We argue that states’ duties to respect one another’s self-determination yield limits on permissible inclusion. When inclusive policies for citizenship undermine the permissible scope of self-determination of other states, they are impermissible; they should either be prohibited, or require compensation.

show abstract

In for a Penny, or: If You Disapprove of Investment Migration, Why Do You Approve of High-Skilled Migration?

Cited by 3 publications

References 53 publications

Not Yours to Sell: The Case Against Private Citizenship Markets

Not Yours to Sell: The Case Against Private Citizenship Markets

Border-Crossing: Immigration Law, Racism and Justified Resistance

Self-Determination and the Limits on the Right to Include

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About