What is the cantilever argument?
An argument that claims if we accept freedom of movement within states or a right to exit, consistency requires accepting a right to enter other states as well.
(Discussed and rejected by Song.)
Relation to mandatory authors:
Discussed and rejected by Sarah Song as a basis for a general human right to migrate.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ “An argument discussed in class…”
➡️ Then: “Song rejects this argument by…”
What is a remedial right to migration?
A right that arises only when something has gone seriously wrong—specifically when basic interests cannot be secured within one’s own state—rather than a general entitlement to move.
(Central to Song.)
Relation to mandatory authors:
Core positive thesis defended by Sarah Song.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ Name Song
What is structural injustice?
Injustice that arises from the interaction of multiple institutions, rules, and practices, even when no single actor intends harm or violates clear duties.
(Central to Parekh.)
Relation to mandatory authors:
Core conceptual framework developed and defended by Serena Parekh to explain the refugee crisis.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ Name Parekh
What is political responsibility?
A form of responsibility grounded in power, capacity, and participation in unjust structures, rather than in blame or causal wrongdoing.
(Parekh’s alternative to blame-based responsibility.)
Relation to mandatory authors:
Central normative concept used by Serena Parekh.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ Name Parekh
What is indirect discrimination?
Discrimination that occurs when formally neutral rules disproportionately disadvantage socially salient groups, even without explicit intent to discriminate.
(Central to Fine.)
Relation to mandatory authors:
Core analytical tool in Sarah Fine’s critique of immigration policy.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ Name Fine
What is cultural injustice?
Injustice that occurs when policies privilege certain cultural traits or histories in ways that reproduce domination or hierarchy.
(Central to Al Hashmi.)
Relation to mandatory authors:
Central concept developed by Rufaida Al Hashmi in the context of refugee selection.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ Name Al Hashmi
What is membership-based evaluation of deportation?
An approach that evaluates deportation by considering social membership, ties, and inclusion, rather than treating deportation as mere border enforcement.
(Central to Lenard.)
Relation to mandatory authors:
Central evaluative framework in Patti Tamara Lenard’s argument.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ Name Lenard
What is non-arbitrariness (in deportation)?
The requirement that coercive state actions be governed by public, justified, and consistent rules rather than discretionary or selective enforcement.
(Lenard.)
Relation to mandatory authors:
Key constraint defended by Patti Tamara Lenard.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ Name Lenard
What is amnesty as vindication?
An understanding of amnesty that treats undocumented migrants as wronged by unjust laws, rather than as wrongdoers to be forgiven.
(Bosniak.)
Relation to mandatory authors:
Core thesis defended by Linda Bosniak.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ Name Bosniak
What is the expressive meaning of immigration policy?
The idea that immigration rules communicate messages about who belongs, who is valued, and who is excluded, beyond their material effects.
(Fine and Al Hashmi.)
Relation to mandatory authors:
Used by Sarah Fine and applied to refugee policy by Rufaida Al Hashmi.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ Name Fine or Al Hashmi (depending on context)
What is non-ideal theory in this course?
An approach that starts from existing injustice, institutional constraints, and political realities rather than from perfectly just conditions, and asks what justice requires under these imperfect circumstances.
Use in exam:
Helps frame Parekh, Lenard, Bosniak.
Relation to mandatory authors:
Used implicitly by Parekh, Lenard, and Bosniak, who all analyze injustice as it actually occurs within existing migration and asylum systems rather than assuming ideal compliance or just institutions.
How to cite in the exam:
➡️ You usually do not name non-ideal theory itself as an authorial thesis
➡️ You name the author (e.g. Parekh, Lenard, Bosniak) and explain how their argument works under non-ideal conditions
➡️ If needed: “Working within a non-ideal framework, Parekh argues that…”
What is realism in migration ethics (as criticized in the course)?
A methodological stance that treats existing state powers and border controls as fixed constraints on moral theory, rather than as objects of critique.
Use in exam:
Sets up Bosniak’s critique.
Relation to mandatory authors:
Critiqued explicitly by Linda Bosniak.
How to cite in exam:
➡️ Name Bosniak
What is critical theory as practiced in this course?
An approach that aims to expose hidden assumptions, power relations, and historical injustices embedded in seemingly neutral laws and institutions.
Use in exam:
Helps frame Fine, Bosniak, Cole.
Relation to mandatory authors:
Practiced explicitly or implicitly by Cole, Fine, Al Hashmi, and Bosniak, all of whom question the moral legitimacy of existing border regimes, selection criteria, and legal frameworks rather than taking them for granted.
How to cite in the exam:
➡️ You normally name the author, not “critical theory”
➡️ Example: “Fine adopts a critical approach by showing that seemingly neutral immigration policies reproduce racial hierarchy.”
➡️ You may say “a critical approach discussed in class” if speaking at a meta level
