Immigration Restrictions

Immigration law and policy has remained one of the most controversial issues within the United Kingdom for over 100 years. The question of whether it is a state’s right to exclude or include individuals at will forms a large part of recent philosophical debate; an issue that becomes particularly contentious in an increasingly human rights conscious arena.
When referring to immigration restrictions, whether on behalf of the state or based on more open border policies, there are three distinct categories for the state to consider.
‘…‘right to exclude’, as it is ordinarily understood, usually incorporates three conceptually distinct rights: a right to exclude outsiders from its territory (from crossing into geographical borders), a right to exclude

For example, partners of settled persons, students, and workers. In regards to international students and migrant workers, there are few who would suggest the English language requirements are unduly harsh or nonsensical. It stands to reason that those wishing to work or study in another state should and would learn the language. However, the matter becomes more complicated when considering the migration of spouses who are not entering employment. Recently, the Supreme Court case of Ali and Bibi ruled that such requirements do not breach ECHR article 8 rights to ‘private and family life’ as they were not unlawful. However the court invited further submissions in order to determine if the Immigration rules were unfair in practice due to the possibly restrictive exceptions. It is a widely known fact that fully immersive learning is particularly effective, coupled with the cost and availability issues in some countries, the English language requirement can serve as a bar to those wanting to immigrate to the UK in order to join family members. This is most likely the intention of the Conservative Government, who have consistently publicised their intention to lower migration into the ‘tens of thousands’. Carens contends:
‘But these considerations do not justify the creation of barriers to the entry of immediate family members. The right of human beings to live with their

The Government has frequently asserted that their control in this area is to combat the legitimate concerns of false asylum claims in order to help those truly in need, prevent a drain on the welfare system and ultimately bring immigration figures down as a whole. But in reality asylum claims were much lower in 2014 than previous figures in 2002 , accounting for eight percent of net migration in 2013. Concerns over terrorism, such as the Paris attacks and the sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, have only led to increased media scrutiny on future asylum