Our collaborators’ Publications

Associate Professor of Law Dr Helena Wray and her Middlesex colleague, Co-Director of the Social Policy Research Centre Eleonore Kofman, consider the latest evidence ahead of the Supreme Court hearing on the minimum income requirement.

Mixed marriages have always had an ambiguous and often problematic relationship with the law. On one hand, mixed marriages have been seen as a key indicator of sociocultural integration into mainstream society. In terms of the law, this perception has been expressed, for example, as privileged access to citizenship status for immigrant family members of citizens. 

Anne-Marie DAOUST

Publics are an undertheorised and somewhat marginal presence in critical security studies. This article argues that a better understanding of publics can advance our understanding of the governance as well as the contestation of security regimes and practices. We develop this argument in three parts. 

Anne-Marie DAOUST

In his article, Barnett makes a convincing case for the need to consider securitization as a mode of problematization. When it comes to security, he enjoins us to consider the role of publics and publicness without necessarily committing to an unreflexive liberal ideal of transparency, non-interference and openness. This response focuses on two central issues that emerge when we pay attention to publics, security and the spaces of their unfolding.

Asylum policies seem to migrate across borders with notably greater ease than asylum seekers themselves. Many - though not all - of these 'mobile' asylum policy instruments aim to securitize deter, deflect and reject asylum seekers. The easy circulation and morphing of ideas between Canada, the US, Australia, the EU Member States and the EU itself can make it difficult to identify sources or label any particular iteration as an instance of emulation. Canada is both sending and receiving country for this policy migration.

Slippery citizenship is a great metaphor. It evokes the contemporary anxiety that legal status increasingly eludes the grasp of those who need and want it most desperately: harder to get, easier to lose, functionally tenuous even when formally secure. Understandably, we are most preoccupied with the predicament of those who seek citizenship - de jure or de facto - from a recalcitrant state. Nevertheless, I want to explore slippery citizenship's mirror image, which I will call "sticky citizenship". The label applies to situations where a states seeks to stick citizenship on an unwilling recipient or where an individual is stuck with a citizenship she wishes to disavow. This preliminary exploration of sticky citizenship is confined to the former. 

In this article Kerry Abrams offers an exploration of some themes that have consistently emerged through the various talks during a conference on immigration during the concluding panel of the conference.

Our immigration law is a complex and politically-charged subject. Through it, we determine who may enter the country and under what conditions, who may stay, and who must leave. We use it to define the group of people eligible to become U.S. citizens. We allow families who have been separated to be reunited. We enhance our global competitiveness through the admission of people with skills, talents, and entrepreneurial ambitions. Immigration law also enables us to provide humanitarian relief to the persecuted by setting forth a framework for obtaining refugee status. In short, immigration law is an important mechanism for shaping our country's future. 

This contribution argues that the sociolegal position of migrant fathers is much more complex and possibly more vulnerable than often perceived, as a consequence of the workings of family law and immigration law. Using (black) feminist critiques of family law, the question is to what extent migrant fathers’ weaker legal position is being caused by ideologies about fatherhood in family law and immigration law that exclude them from being “good fathers.” The argument is based on an analysis of European Court of Human Rights case law on affiliation, divorce, custody, visiting rights, and residence.

De Hart discusses these forms of regulation of sex, relationships and marriages between groups that were considered ‘racially’ or ‘ethnically’ mixed. She provides historical examples, such as the measures against ‘Negrocabarets’ and against Dutch-Chinese marriages, both in the 1930s.


February 29th 2016

The Home Office is proposing a massive 25% increase in already high immigration application fees for families for the year 2016-17. Family and spouse visas will in future cost £1,195.

February 29th 2016

Immigration Minister John McCallum says he’s planning on introducing changes in the “next couple of months” that will grant permanent resident status to the sponsored spouses of Canadians, immediately, upon arriving in Canada.

February 11th 2016

Under the EU citizens’ Directive, currently EU citizens can bring with them to another Member State their spouse or partner, the children of both (or either) who are under 21 or dependent, and the dependent parents of either.