Conceptualizing Semi-Legality in Migration Research

Abstract

What is semi‐legality, and why does it offer a viable alternative to the legality–illegality binary divide? Semi‐legality, as a heuristic device, is useful to frame the various “in‐between” statuses and not resorting to illegality every time ambiguities arise as this casts the net of potential fraud far too wide. It could be viewed as a multidimensional space where migrants' formal relationships with the state interact with their various forms of agency toward the law. As a sensitizing theoretical perspective, it helps to explain why many neoliberal regimes, which claim that law and order are the main features distinguishing them from others, actually engage in perpetuating the legally ambiguous modes of incorporation. Delineating the conditions of semi‐legality, I use data from 360 qualitative interviews with migrants in four European countries. I discuss: (1) “incomplete” responses to regularization programs (amnesties) – de facto fulfilling the legalization conditions, yet facing barriers to formally (de jure) corroborate this; (2) balancing between the temporality of residence in various EU countries—under‐staying in some and overstaying in others; and (3) the nexus with employment—where migrants' residence in a country is lawful, but their work exceeds the restrictions permitted by their visas.

Integration against the state: Irregular migrants’ agency between deportation and regularisation in the United Kingdom

“…On the other hand, the ever-increasing complexity and diversification of these various policy regimes explain some of the conceptual difficulties surrounding contemporary migrant irregularity, which a growing number of scholars are trying to overcome by questioning the strict dichotomy between 'legal' and 'illegal' migratory status. While some have suggested alternative concepts that capture a more fluid range of in-between statuses (Goldring et al, 2009;Kubal, 2013;Ruhs and Anderson, 2010), others emphasise the increasing diversity of potential paths into and out of irregularity (Black et al, 2006;Calavita, 2003;Cvajner and Sciortino, 2010a;Düvell, 2011), as well as a certain hierarchy among different kinds of irregular status (Chauvin and Garcés-Mascareñas, 2012;Cvajner and Sciortino, 2010a). It has also been shown that irregular migrants are often incorporated into some spheres of society (whether formally or informally) but simultaneously excluded from others (Castles, 1995;Chauvin and Garcés-Mascareñas, 2014;Cvajner and Sciortino, 2010b;Mezzadra, 2011;Ruhs and Anderson, 2010).…”

Introduction to a Special Issue on the Impact of Immigrant Legalization Initiatives: International Perspectives on Immigration and the World of Work

“…Prior research has revealed that men and women follow distinct migration paths, form different social networks, and navigate dissimilar expectations of reproductive labor (Hondagneu-Sotelo 1994;Hagan 1998;Goldring 2003). For example, because women are more prominent in the informal sector, they faced greater constraints in their efforts for legal status (Kubal 2013). Research from a survey of low-wage workers in three major immigrant destinations found that unauthorized women had significantly higher rates of minimum wage and overtime violations than did unauthorized male workers (Petrescu-Prahova and Spiller 2016).…”

Regulating Movement of the Very Mobile: Selected Legal and Policy Aspects of Ukrainian Migration to EU Countries

“…The commonly observed administrative status of Ukrainians in the EU is what is termed semi-compliance (see for example Kubal 2013;Ruhs and Anderson 2010), namely possessing valid documents authorizing stay, but doing undeclared work. This should be distinguished from non-compliance, where migrants have no authorization to stay, and thus work, in EU countries.…”