Sham marriages, citizenship markets, and immigration resistance

The morality of sham marriage has been largely overlooked in the ethics of immigration. The aim of this article is to fill this gap by defending sham marriages both as a form of informal citizenship market and immigration resistance. Sham marriages are pro tanto morally permissible because they are a free and mutually beneficial exchange and do not undermine the institution and value of marriage. Moreover, this pro tanto permissibility is not defeated by the infringement of other rights or otherwise outweighed by competing interests or considerations. The first part assumes that states have a right to exclude unwanted immigrants, but holds that such right is limited by the right of citizens to marry foreign partners. Sham marriages constitute an informal citizenship market, and as such they are immune to the standard objections raised against their formal counterparts. The second part rejects that states have a right to exclude, arguing that foreigners may enter into sham marriages with citizens to bypass unjust immigration restrictions. In this case, the monetary exchange that takes place in sham marriages is not problematic, for citizens have no antecedent duty to marry unauthorized migrants.

Publication Details

Journal
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.46661/ripp(ijpt).10644
Primary Topic
Political Philosophy and Ethics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Sham marriages, citizenship markets, and immigration resistance

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Political Philosophy and Ethics
article

Sham marriages, citizenship markets, and immigration resistance

article en

Abstract

The morality of sham marriage has been largely overlooked in the ethics of immigration. The aim of this article is to fill this gap by defending sham marriages both as a form of informal citizenship market and immigration resistance. Sham marriages are pro tanto morally permissible because they are a free and mutually beneficial exchange and do not undermine the institution and value of marriage. Moreover, this pro tanto permissibility is not defeated by the infringement of other rights or otherwise outweighed by competing interests or considerations. The first part assumes that states have a right to exclude unwanted immigrants, but holds that such right is limited by the right of citizens to marry foreign partners. Sham marriages constitute an informal citizenship market, and as such they are immune to the standard objections raised against their formal counterparts. The second part rejects that states have a right to exclude, arguing that foreigners may enter into sham marriages with citizens to bypass unjust immigration restrictions. In this case, the monetary exchange that takes place in sham marriages is not problematic, for citizens have no antecedent duty to marry unauthorized migrants.

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 46%
Political Philosophy and Ethics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.