Advertisement

Philosophical Studies

, Volume 175, Issue 11, pp 2859–2877 | Cite as

Citizenship for children: By soil, by blood, or by paternalism?

  • Luara FerracioliEmail author
Article

Abstract

Do states have a right to exclude prospective immigrants as they see fit? According to statists the answer is a qualified yes. For these authors, self-determining political communities have a prima facie right to exclude, which can be overridden by the claims of vulnerable groups such as refugees and children born in the state’s territory. However, there is a concern in the literature that statists have not yet developed a theory that can protect children born in the territory from being excluded from the political community. For if the self-determining political community has the right to decide who should form the self in the first place, then that right should count against both newcomers by immigration and newcomers by birth. Or so the concern goes. In this essay, I defend statism against this line of criticism and provide a liberal justification for the inclusion of children born within the state’s borders. My account leads to some surprising implication for citizenship law, as well as immigration arrangements in the area of asylum and unauthorized immigration.

Keywords

Children Immigration Citizenship Paternalism Statism 

Notes

Acknowledgements

For excellent comments and suggestions, I would like to thank Christian Barry, Ryan Cox, Dan Halliday, Eszter Kollar, R. J. Leland, Serena Olsaretti, Kim Rubenstein, Ana Tanasoca, Rosa Terlazzo and two anonymous reviewers for Phil Studies. I would also like to thank audiences at the University of Sydney, University of Leiden, ANU, Goethe University of Frankfurt, Central European University, Pompeu Fabra and the University of Melbourne. Special thanks to the Philosophy Program at the ANU for providing me with a great environment to write this piece in 2016, and the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research for financially supporting my research via a VENI grant (275-20-148).

References

  1. Abizadeh, A. (2008). Democratic theory and border coercion: No right to unilaterally control your own borders. Political Theory, 36, 37–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J., & Claassen, R. (2012). Sailing alone: Teenage autonomy and regimes of childhood. Law and Philosophy, 31, 495–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arneson, R. J., & Shapiro, I. (1996). Democratic autonomy and religious freedom: A critique of Wisconsin v. Yoder. Political Order, 38, 365–411.Google Scholar
  4. Baubock, R. (2006). Stakeholder citizenship and transnational political participation: A normative evaluation of external voting. Fordham Law Review, 75, 2393.Google Scholar
  5. Bernstein, R. J. (2005). Hannah Arendt on the stateless. Parallax, 11, 46–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blake, M. (2001). Distributive justice, state coercion, and autonomy. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 30, 257–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blake, M. (2013). Immigration, jurisdiction, and exclusion. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 41, 103–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bosniak, L. (2000). Citizenship denationalized. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 7, 447–509.Google Scholar
  9. Bou-Habib, P., & Olsaretti, S. (2015). Autonomy and children’s well-being. In A. Bagattini & C. MacLeod (Eds.), The nature of children’s well-being: Theory and practice. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Brezger, J., & Cassee, A. (2016). Debate: Immigrants and newcomers by birth—Do statist arguments imply a right to exclude both? Journal of Political Philosophy, 24, 367–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brighouse, H. (2002). What rights (if any) do children have?”. In D. Archard & C. Macleod (Eds.), The moral and political status of children: New essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Brighouse, H., & Swift, A. (2006). Parents’ rights and the value of the family. Ethics, 117, 80–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carens, J. (1987). Aliens and citizens: The case for open borders. Review of Politics, 49, 251–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carens, J. (2013). The ethics of immigration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Cole, P. (2000). Philosophies of exclusion: Liberal political theory and immigration. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  16. De Shutter, H., & Ypi, L. (2015). Mandatory citizenship for immigrants. British Journal of Political Science, 45, 235–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Feinberg, J. (1980/1992). The child’s right to an open future. In J. Feinberg (Ed.), Freedom and fulfillment: Philosophical essays. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Ferracioli, L. (2014). The state’s duty to ensure children are loved. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy, 8(2), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ferracioli, L. (2015). Immigration, self-determination and the brain drain. Review of International Studies, 41(1), 99–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gheaus, A. (2012). The right to parent one’s biological baby. Journal of Political Philosophy, 20, 432–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gutmann, A. (1980). Children, paternalism, and education: A liberal argument. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 9, 338–358.Google Scholar
  22. Joppke, C. (2007). Transformation of citizenship: Status, rights, identity. Citizenship Studies, 11, 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lister, M. (2010). Citizenship, in the immigration context. University of Maryland Law Review, 70, 205–209.Google Scholar
  24. Macleod, C. (2002). Liberal equality and the affective family. In D. Archard & C. Macleod (Eds.), The moral and political status of children. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Mill, J. S. (1866). On liberty. Boston: Ticknor & Fields.Google Scholar
  26. Miller, D. (2005). Immigration: The case for limits. In A. Cohen & C. Wellman (Eds.), Contemporary debates in applied ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  27. Miller, D. (2010). Why immigration controls are not coercive: A reply to Arash Abizadeh. Political Theory, 38, 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miller, D. (2016). Strangers in our midst: The political philosophy of immigration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Morris, L. (2002). Managing migration: Civic stratification and migrants’ rights. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  30. Munoz-Dardé, V. (1999). Is the family to be abolished then? Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 99, 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Oberman, K. (2013). Can brain drain justify immigration restrictions? Ethics, 123, 427–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Oberman, K. (2017). Immigration, citizenship, and consent: What is wrong with permanent alienage? Journal of Political Philosophy, 25, 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pettit, P. (2015). The robust demands of the good: Ethics with attachment, virtue, and respect. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pevnick, R. (2011). Immigration and the constraints of justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shachar, A. (2009). The birthright lottery: Citizenship and global inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Shiffrin, S. V. (2000). Paternalism, unconscionability doctrine, and accommodation. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 29, 205–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Simmons, A. J. (1999). Justification and legitimacy. Ethics, 109, 739–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Soysal, Y. N. (1994). Limits of citizenship: Migrants and postnational membership in Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  39. Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of justice. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  40. Wellman, C. H. (2008). Immigration and freedom of association. Ethics, 119, 109–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wellman, C. H., & Cole, P. (2011). Debating the ethics of immigration: Is there a right to exclude?. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of SydneyCamperdownAustralia
  2. 2.University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations