Justice in migration: a case for the right of reunification
| dc.contributor.author | Gagnon, Eric | |
| dc.contributor.examiningcommittee | Hannan, Sarah (Political Studies) | en_US |
| dc.contributor.examiningcommittee | Leland, RJ (Philosophy) | en_US |
| dc.contributor.supervisor | Lecce, Steven (Political Studies) | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-09-24T17:44:26Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2020-09-24T17:44:26Z | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2020-09-19 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020-09-19 | en_US |
| dc.date.submitted | 2020-09-19T21:34:40Z | en_US |
| dc.degree.discipline | Political Studies | en_US |
| dc.degree.level | Master of Arts (M.A.) | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | Historically, philosophers who have written on the ethics of global migration have defended the state’s broad discretionary powers over its immigration policy. This thesis challenges the conventional view on immigration by highlighting the normative value of intimate associations like the family, romantic relationships, friendships, and caregiver-dependent relationships, and the manner by which borders can prevent one from being with their loved ones. This thesis begins by establishing the notion that individuals have fundamental interests in being able to form and maintain close affective ties with those whom they love – interests so vital that it is plausible to confer onto them the protection of a right. The rights to form and maintain intimate associations with others entails a derivative right of reunification, which as matter of justice places corresponding duties on states to grant entry to those who stand in a morally significant relationship with its citizens. The right to be reunited with those whom one shares close affective ties is not an unfettered right, and therefore it may justifiably be curtailed if and only if there are sound reasons against its unqualified provision and only to the extent that is required to address the reasons for its curtailment. If restrictions are justifiably placed on the amount of reunification and other migratory claims the state can accept, I will suggest that states should prioritize the reunification of caregiver-dependent relationships and relationships between adults of the most intimate kind over other reunification claims, and perhaps over some other migratory claims. | en_US |
| dc.description.note | October 2020 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | Chicago | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1993/35089 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
| dc.rights | open access | en_US |
| dc.subject | Global migration | en_US |
| dc.subject | Immigration | en_US |
| dc.subject | Reunification | en_US |
| dc.subject | Liberalism | en_US |
| dc.subject | Autonomy | en_US |
| dc.subject | Basic rights | en_US |
| dc.title | Justice in migration: a case for the right of reunification | en_US |
| dc.type | master thesis | en_US |