Standing on Our Own Two Feet: Disability Justice as a Frame for Reimagining Our Ableist Immigration System

Abstract

Ableism forms the scaffolding of our immigration laws, policies, and practices, but the operation of this pervasive form of exclusion has been grossly unacknowledged and understudied until now.  In 1882, Congress first codified the exclusion of defective bodies by declaring that, “any lunatic, idiot, or any person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge,” was unworthy of admission onto U.S. shores.  These ability-based hierarchies remain in today’s immigration system which rewards productivity, educational attainment, and high-skilled labor with regularized immigration status, an array of public benefits, work authorization, and other advantages.  We argue that immigration legal and policy frameworks must be reimagined in order to decouple the process of migration from this system of body valuation.

This Article is the first to argue that dismantling ableism must be a core imperative of the movement for immigration abolition, and that the principles of disability justice can serve as a tool for identifying the radical changes necessary to achieve this transformation.

We begin by interrogating abolitionist scholarship.  We observe the limited acknowledgment of the role that ableism has played in erecting systems of oppression and the consequent absence of anti-ableist strategies to achieve a vision of abolition that eliminates the categorization and stratification of bodies.  We then look more closely at the immigration system and the ways in which it creates categories of exclusion based on perceptions of worth and productivity.  We also illuminate how ableism has fueled the erection of access barriers for disabled immigrants, and the resulting disempowerment of these individuals as they navigate complex immigration procedures.  We contend that decoupling migration from ableism and advancing access as a pathway to power and self-determination for immigrant communities must become a part of the abolitionist vision. This approach encourages the exploration of new solutions drawn from the lessons of the disability rights and disability justice movements.

We then explore three specific ways in which ableism operates in the modern immigration system.  We posit that ableism: (1) undergirds the construction of disabled immigrants as unworthy burdens; (2) robs disabled immigrants of agency and self-determination; and (3) invisibilizes the experiences of disabled immigrants navigating immigration processes and the advocacy ecosystem. We look to the ten principles of disability justice to propose transformative solutions to address these systemic problems. We argue that accounting for ableism as an intrinsic and formative component of the existing immigration system will augment existing eff orts to achieve change. We hope that this reframing is only the beginning for new lines of scholarly and empirical exploration. Our goal is to reimagine migration for disabled people, and, in turn, for all bodies that cross borders.

[pdf-embedder url="https://www.uclalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/securepdfs/2024/04/01-Arastu-Naqui-No-Bleed.pdf" title="01 - Arastu & Naqui No-Bleed"]

About the Author

Nermeen Arastu, Associate Professor of Law and Co-Director, Immigrant and Non-Citizen Rights Clinic, Th e City University of New York School of Law (CUNY Law). With many thanks to Natalie Chin, Lenni Benson, Laila Hlass, Kit Johnson, Daniel Morales, and Jaya Ramji-Nogales for their support at various stages of brainstorming and review. We are indebted to all participants in the New Voices in Immigration Workshop at the Association of American Law Schools 2023 Annual Meeting and the Clinical Writing Workshop 2023 at New York University School of Law for their thoughtful suggestions and comments. The author is indebted to CUNY Law students Elizabeth Fox and Noor Sheikh for invaluable research assistance and editing support and Antalya Badi and Luqmaan Thein for their work with source gathering, background research and analysis. It has been a privilege to work with the intrepid UCLA Law Review team, especially Kelly Mathews, Danielle Garcia, and Sahar Jahangard-Mahboob, thank you for your relentless work and commitment to this piece and publication. At the time when this article was written, Qudsiya Naqui served as Visiting Assistant Professor in the CUNY School of Law’s Immigrant and Noncitizen Rights Clinic. She currently serves as Senior Counsel in the Office for Access to Justice at the U.S. Department of Justice. The views presented here were given in her individual capacity prior to her employment with the Department of Justice’s Office for Access to Justice and do not reflect the views of the Department of Justice. The author thanks Lenni Benson, Kit Johnson, Daniel Morales, Jaya-Ramji-Nogales, and all participants in the New Voices in Immigration Workshop at the Association of American Law Schools 2023 Annual Meeting for their invaluable feedback. Additional thanks to all participants in the 2022 Clinical Writing Workshop at New York University School of Law. The author also expresses deep gratitude to Elizabeth Fox, Noor Sheikh, and Maria Thompson for excellent research assistance; Antalya Badi and Luqmaan Thein for their work with source gathering, background research and analysis; and the editors of the UCLA Law Review for their thoughtful feedback.

By LRIRE
/* ]]> */