The Advocate’s Dilemma: Framing Migrant Rights in National Settings

Cook, María Lorena

doi:10.26522/ssj.v4i2.999

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…My project focuses on the discursive framing process, defined as 'conscious strategic efforts by groups of people to fashion shared understandings of the world and of themselves that legitimate and motivate collective action' (Keck andSikkink 1998, Snow andBenford 1988). 4 Based on inductive analysis of NOII Toronto's DADT campaign, I identified NOII's use of a human rights framing as a central discursive strategy deployed by movement activists in order to mobilize a broad range of constituents and garner national media attention; this finding is supported by recent research that cites the intentional use of human rights discourse by NOII and other 'no borders' movements to bolster claims against the state (Basok 2009, Cook 2010, Grugel and Piper 2011. Social movement scholars have examined the usefulness of human rights frames for mobilizing a broad range of constituents across varying cultural and political contexts, thereby bolstering efforts to hold states accountable (Keck and Sikkink 1998, Jenness and Grattet 2001, Grugel and Piper 2011.…”

Section: S Abji 326mentioning

confidence: 95%

“…More recently, scholars examining NOII and other 'no borders' movements have begun to highlight the tensions and opportunities involved for these movements in making claims against the state (McDonald 2007, Racine et al 2008, Basok 2009, Cook 2010, Fortier 2010, Nyers 2010. For example, Cook shows how human rights frames used within national immigration debates in the USA (as opposed to transnational or international debates) still have relatively little resonance compared with the use of state-centred frames in shifting public opinion; yet, the use of state-centred frames is self-limiting, in that they may reinforce the values and assumptions that produce immigration restrictions in the first place -a challenge coined the 'advocate's dilemma' (2010).…”

Section: S Abji 326mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Post-nationalism re-considered: a case study of the ‘No One Is Illegal’ movement in Canada

Abji

2012

Citizenship Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies of post-nationalism have declined considerably among citizenship scholars in recent decades, and have been largely ignored by social movement scholars in favour of more trans-national approaches. Using a case analysis of a migrant rights movement in Canada as evidence of a 'post-national ethics in practice', in this article I argue for a re-consideration of the usefulness of post-nationalism within current scholarship on precarious immigration status. Taking into account both the limitations and opportunities afforded by a post-national ethical framework, I examine how the movement uses a human rights framing in distinct ways to mobilize constituents, garner mainstream media attention, and effect changes to policy at the national and local level. My findings suggest that the use of human rights frames for these movements offers both risks and rewards; however, the benefits may outweigh the risks in cases in which the quality of exposure within mainstream narratives is enough to disrupt, even if momentarily, the pervasiveness of normative nationalism, opening up new spaces for reconfiguring citizenship at the local level.

show abstract

Section: S Abji 326mentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: S Abji 326mentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-nationalism re-considered: a case study of the ‘No One Is Illegal’ movement in Canada

Abji

2012

Citizenship Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This approach represents a common 'dilemma of migrant advocacy in advanced industrial democracies, where a more universal conception of immigrant rights based in human rights has little resonance (Cook 2010). As such, a large emphasis is placed on the constitutional protections afforded to immigrants, as was the case in the wake of Arizona's controversial Senate Bill 1070.…”

Section: The Landscape Of Immigrant Rights Framesmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘They come here to work’: an evaluation of the economic argument in favor of immigrant rights

Gleeson

2015

Citizenship Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advocates commonly highlight the exploitation that hard-working undocumented immigrants commonly suffer at the hands of employers, the important contribution they make to the US economy, and the fiscal folly of border militarization and enhanced immigration enforcement policies. In this paper, I unpack these economic rationales for expanding immigrant rights, and examine the nuanced ways in which advocates deploy this frame. To do so, I rely on statements issued by publicly present immigrant rights groups in six places: California, Florida, Illinois, New York, Texas, and Washington, DC. I also draw on interviews with immigrant advocates in San Jose, CA and Houston, TX, press releases from two alternative national immigrant rights organizations, and an ethnographic photo-documentation of immigrant rights mobilizations in 2012-2014. Economic rationales, I emphasize, can be found in each of these contexts, but are not mutually exclusive to other justifications, including narratives about civil, human, and family rights for immigrants. However, I argue that an economic framing of immigrant rights nonetheless runs the risk reifying work over conventional understandings of criminality, often relies on a narrow definition of economic worth, and could have negative consequences for coalition building. Advocates commonly highlight the exploitation that hard-working undocumented immigrants commonly suffer at the hands of employers, the important contribution they make to the US economy, and the fiscal folly of border militarization and enhanced immigration enforcement policies. In this paper, I unpack these economic rationales for expanding immigrant rights, and examine the nuanced ways in which advocates deploy this frame. To do so, I rely on statements issued by publicly present immigrant rights groups in six places: California, Florida, Illinois, New York, Texas, and Washington, DC. I also draw on interviews with immigrant advocates in San Jose, CA and Houston, TX, press releases from two alternative national immigrant rights organizations, and an ethnographic photo-documentation of immigrant rights mobilizations in 2012-2014. Economic rationales, I emphasize, can be found in each of these contexts, but are not mutually exclusive to other justifications, including narratives about civil, human, and family rights for immigrants. However, I argue that an economic framing of immigrant rights nonetheless runs the risk reifying work over conventional understandings of criminality, often relies on a narrow definition of economic worth, and could have negative consequences for coalition building.

show abstract

“…To do so, it focuses on the work of domestic CSOs engaging with policy debates about refugee and asylum rights in the United Kingdom. This is a particularly useful example because previous studies have found that these organisations face significant challenges in navigating policy debates which are largely hostile to their views (Cook, 2010;Cullen, 2009;McGhee et al, 2016;Somerville and Wallace Goodman, 2010;Statham and Geddes, 2006).The article presents an analysis of research into the 'policy narratives' of seven case study organisations working in the UK to explore how these challenges shape the organisations' interventions into policy debates in the UK field and, consequently, how they position themselves as policy actors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The narrative assemblage of civil society interventions into refugee and asylum policy debates in the UK

Tonkiss

2018

Voluntary Sector Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores how pro-refugee civil society organisations discursively navigate the challenges of influencing policy in contexts that are largely hostile to their perspective, and the tensions implicit in doing so. It draws on rich documentary data to present an analysis of the policy narratives of seven case study organisations in the UK. Through this analysis, the article argues that these narratives form an ‘assemblage’ of discursive conformity to and contestation of the dominant construction of the policy problem, with the organisations concurrently positioned both as experts in the field and as facilitating expert knowledge transfer from refugees themselves. It is through this assemblage that the organisations negotiate the dilemmas arising from their largely adversarial positioning in the policy debate.

show abstract

The Advocate’s Dilemma: Framing Migrant Rights in National Settings

Cited by 15 publications

References 29 publications

Post-nationalism re-considered: a case study of the ‘No One Is Illegal’ movement in Canada

Post-nationalism re-considered: a case study of the ‘No One Is Illegal’ movement in Canada

‘They come here to work’: an evaluation of the economic argument in favor of immigrant rights

The narrative assemblage of civil society interventions into refugee and asylum policy debates in the UK

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About