The legal and moral issues concerning immigration have been debated for countless of times since their booming popularity during the 19th century. People who believe that it is morally wrong for a country to deny immigration status argue that immigration promotes democracy, egalitarianism and libertarianism. On the other hand, people who believe that countries have every right to deny people who seek immigration argue that immigration taints the cultural roots of a country, weakens national security and reduces the natural resources that would have been distributed to the original citizens of the country.
To properly understand the philosophy of immigration, it is imperative to define immigration. Article I, section 8, clause 4 of the constitution gives the United States Congress the sole power to determine and pass a uniform rule of naturalization. With this express power by the Unites States Constitution, Congress has passed several stringent laws that govern immigration and naturalization. One of this statute that is still in effect today is the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. The law made a clear distinction between a resident alien and a naturalized citizen. Both, however, are considered by the law as immigration.
As such, even naturalized citizens of a country are considered to be immigrants. Herein then lies the heart of immigration philosophy – Do countries have the moral justification to close its borders to people seeking immigration?
Immigration, although permitted is typically restricted and selective. This is to say that host countries seek immigrants who will contribute a net economic gain to the host country. Prospective immigrants must show the potential to contribute positively to the host society.
A...
... middle of paper ...
...e welfare of its citizens. They argue that a country’s acceptance of immigrants is an unnecessary burden to the host country since it detracts the government of its duty to the natural-born citizens.
As such, the dividing line for and against immigration based on philosophical and moral justifications is still blurred. There is still no consensus as to whether immigration should maintain the status quo or not.
Works Cited
• Pevnick, R., 2009, “Social Trust and the Ethics of Immigration Policy,” The Journal of Political Philosophy, 17: 146–167.
• Swain, C., (ed.), 2007, Debating Immigration, New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Sarah Starkweather. "US immigration legislation online". University of Washington, Bothell Library. Retrieved April 7, 2012.
• Cole, P. and Wellman, C., 2011, Is There a Right to Exclude? New York: Oxford University Press.
Though immigration is not a new phenomenon in the world’s history, it has been notice that now days immigration has increased more than ever. This is mainly caused because of better ways of communication and transportation, which it makes it possible to people to move and enter other countries. However there are many types of immigrations such as economical, retirement immigrants or even ‘natural disasters’ immigrants. People sometimes seek a new life to save themselves from poverty and misery, thus they decide to enjoy the benefits of another country. Still there are other immigrants who are forced to leave their countries because of wars or even natural disasters, such as the tsunami in Japan 2011. Some philosophers consider closed borders to restrict people freedom of movement and that global justice is been violated. On the other hand Miller and other philosophers argued that immigration causes more disadvantages than advantages into the country they enter. Also they agree that states have a moral right to limit immigrations in order to prevent any changes in their culture, as immigration affects several things, even if this means that they will violate human rights. Another concern for the states is the welfare state where sometimes it may be limited and countries cannot afford any immigrants. However, is it right to oppose people rights of freedom, or is it correct for states to limit immigration?
"The main controversy lies in the passing of a plethera of laws throughout the existence of the US regulating immigration and in the handling of illegal immigration. Modern immigration polocies have recieved less and less publicity as tolerance becomes more widespread, although each person is entitled to their own opinion about the issue" (Conover 342).
The American dream, as some may call it, is a cherished idea by those who may lack opportunities. For those in Mexico, it is something that is sure to have crossed their minds sometime in their life. The United States, to foreigners, has been looked at as a sign of opportunity and freedom from oppressive governments or unfortunate living conditions. The Other Side of Immigration takes a look at the Mexican nation and provides thought-provoking interview segments about the people still living in the nation who experience and observe the effects of immigration to the United States.
Most of the United States (U.S) is comprised of immigrants—including those who have migrated to the States from another country and those whose ancestors freely travelled to the States in search of a fresh start. Every year, the U.S. grants a limited number of people around the world the opportunity to immigrate to the States each year. As a result of the restriction, citizens from neighboring countries cross the border illegally. According to an article by Jens Manuel Krogstad, 11.3 million unauthorized immigrants reside in the U.S. in 2014. This whopping number has stirred controversy both politically and economically for America’s government officials. As a result, many people argue whether illegal immigrants should or should not be aided
In his address to a joint session of Congress on January 8, 1918, President Woodrow Wilson declared freedom of the seas in times of peace and war. Looking back, it seems ridiculous to think that anyone could challenge the right of individuals to navigate the oceans freely. However, fast-forward to the twenty-first century and we can see an analogous debate over the issue of immigration rights, with territorial borders being the main topic of discussion. The system of immigration in the United States is complex and oftentimes restrictive, and while revisions to the system usually include increasing quotas or other solutions to let in certain groups of people who deserve special consideration (such as those whose skills are needed in a particular field), they are still very limited solutions. The obvious question that arises from letting in some people but not others is that of fairness. Is the accident of birth or luck of being in the right place at the right time enough to justify restrictive citizenship to a select few? I would argue not. I intend to argue that a commitment to human rights entails the position that borders ought to be open in order to guarantee other human rights, especially the right to migrate.
A topic crucial to the world today is illegal immigration. Illegal immigration is when people live in a country without permission from the government, nor have any legal documentation. As more and more illegal immigrants enter the United States, it either upsets some people, or others feel like they should just grant them ability to pursue life, liberty, and happiness because that is what the Constitution says. Some people feel that illegal immigrants should be protected by the same rights and laws as American citizens. On the other hand, many people believe that this is a horrible mistake. They feel that the rights of citizenship should be earned and not extended to people who haven broken the law just by being in the United States.
Wellman, Christopher, and Phillip Cole. Debating the Ethics of Immigration is There a Right ti Exclude?. New York : Oxford University Press, 2011. Print.
Immigration is just the action of leaving their own countries and come to live in the new countries. The purpose of immigration were found a new better homeland to survive. There was nothing wrong with wanting to remove to another country for got a better life.
Immigration in the United States is a very sensitive topic. Trough out the years the government in the United States have been developing different reforms regarding immigration that unfortunately have not helped to provide a fair solution to illegal immigrants. Looking at the history of immigration it is palpable that over the years immigration laws undergo different ways. For instance in 1950, the Internal Security Act barred admission to any foreigner who was communist because it would be prejudicial to the public interest or would endanger the safety of the United States. Different reforms had contributed to the way that illegal immigrants are treated in the United States.
Throughout the past centuries, immigration has had many positive and negative impacts on our country and society. Law and order have been the founding cornerstone of our democracy, and the mandate of the U.S. Constitution is for Congress to do the work of the people and that of the nation. Immigration has continuously been a passionate debate within our society. This particular topic will always be a sensitive subject due to Americans personal beliefs and morals.
...ol.” Debates on Immigration. Ed Judith Gans, Elaine M. Repogle, and Daniel J. Tichenor. Thousand Oaks, CA SAGE Reference, 2012: 144. Gale Virtual Library. Web. 22 Apr, 2014.
The former option has yielded excellent results for the United States, with immigrants owning almost one in five of the small businesses in America (Bass). The latter keeps a country’s workforce filled with workers who are at an ideal age for work, thus balancing out workers loss from retirement. Many people worry that with the large influx of immigrants coming to countries like America, they will be left with no resources as a native-born citizen. A government’s job should be to accommodate the citizen’s reasonable needs.
Immigration is a controversial topic that features conflicting opinions on a global scale. This is because skeptics believe that immigrants are taking away the original culture and traditions of individual societies, whereas, those supporting immigration believe that immigrants in fact enrich the culture of the host countries and provide great benefits to the country overall. This ongoing debate regarding immigration has led to the increased difficulty in gaining national citizenship in some countries, such as Saudi Arabia. Other countries, however, welcome immigrants as they believe foreigners are valuable to society. Immigration around the world should be encouraged as immigrants increase diversity, add to the amount of skills and labor opportunities available to the countries they move to, and improve the economy.
The issue of immigrants’ rights versus preserving dominant cultural traits in a society has only become more pressing as globalization has increased. This increased globalization has caused mass migration from certain areas of the world, often afflicted with famine, strive and poverty, to the West. As nations tackle these pressing issues and attempt to deal with their new residents, certain questions have to be answered. Are all cultures equal? Do nations have a right to assert the dominance of their culture over those brought in from the outside? Or, rather, do individuals have the right to legally move between nations while preserving their cultural ties...
In addition, the Immigration brings many profits to the host country. Firstly, immigrants supply to the host country a large amount of tax money. For example, I read in the “Ca Mau” newspaper, in the United Kingdom, the government research showed that the tax money that immigrants paid $ 4 billion higher than the amount of benefits intended to them. Moreover, in the United State, the National Research Council estimates that national income rose 8 billion in a year by immigrants.