Immigration Punishment

International Legal Research

Information about Immigration Punishment in free legal resources:

Treaties & Agreements

International Organizations

Jurisprudence $ Commentary

European Union

IP Law

Immigration Punishment

The Historical Development of Immigration Punishment

Understanding Immigration Punishment and Deportation

Immigration Detention

There is not agreement on the question as to whether immigration detention is or is not punishment. Not all all coercive forms of state power are punishment, but, in fact, immigration detainees senses their experiences of detention as punishment. Specially in nations like Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States, where immigration detainees, and asylum seekers in particular in the case of the United Kingdom, can be housed in prisons, with national prisoners.

Resources

Further Reading

  • Ackerman, A. R., & Furman, R. (2013). The criminalization of immigration and the privatization of the immigration detention: Implications for justice. Contemporary Justice Review, 16(2), 251-263.
  • Agamben, G. (1998). Homo sacer: Sovereign power and bare life (D. Heller-Roazen, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  • Alberti, G. (2010). Across the borders of Lesvos: The gendering of migrants’ detention in the Aegean. Feminist Review, 94(1), 138-147.
  • Amit, R. (2015). The expansion of illegality: Immigration detention in South Africa. In A. Nethery & S. J. Silverman (Eds.), Immigration detention: The migration of a policy and its human impact (pp. 145-153). Abingdon, U.K.: Routledge.
  • Bosworth, M. (2014). Inside immigration detention. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Arbel, E. (2015). Between protection and punishment: The irregular arrival regime in Canadian refugee law. In K. Reiter & A. Koenig (Eds.), Extreme punishment: Comparative studies in detention, incarceration, and solitary confinement (pp. 197-219). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Athwal, H. (2015). “I don’t have a life to live” : Deaths and U.K. detention. Race & Class, 56(3), 50-68.
  • Athwal, H., & Bourne, J. (2007). Driven to despair: Asylum deaths in the U.K. Race & Class, 48(4), 106-114.
  • Bacon, C. (2005). The evolution of immigration detention in the U.K.: The involvement of private prison companies (RSC Working Paper No. 27). Retrieved from University of Oxford’s Refugee Studies Centre Working Paper Series website: https://www.rsc.ox.ac.uk/files/publications/working-paper-series/wp27-evolution-immigration-detention-uk-2005.pdf.
  • Baird, T. (2016). Who is responsible for harm in immigration detention? Models of accountability for private corporations (GDP Working Paper No. 11). Geneva, Switzerland: Global Detention Project.
  • Barker, V. (2012). Global mobility and penal order: Criminalizing migration, a view from Europe. Sociology Compass, 6(2), 113-121.
  • Bashford, A., & Strange, C. (2002). Asylum-seekers and national histories of detention. Australian Journal of Politics and History, 48(4), 509-527.
  • Bauman, Z. (1998). Globalization. Oxford: Polity Press.
  • Belcher, O., & Martin, L. L. (2013). Ethnographies of closed doors: Conceptualising openness and closure in U.S. immigration and military institutions. Area, 45(4), 403-410.
  • Bhui, H. S. (2016). Can inspection produce meaningful change in immigration detention? Global Detention Project Working Papers (GDP Working Paper No. 12). Geneva, Switzerland: Global Detention Project.
  • Black, R., Collyer, M., Skeldon, R., & Waddington, C. (2006). Routes to illegal residence: A case study of immigration detainees in the United Kingdom. Geoforum, 37(4), 552-564.
  • Bosworth, M. (2007). Immigration detention in Britain. In M. Lee (Ed.), Human trafficking (pp. 159-177). Collumpton, U.K.: Willan Publishing.
  • Bosworth, M. (2011). Human rights and immigration detention. In M.-B. Dembour & T. Kelly (Eds.), Are human rights for migrants? Critical reflections on the status of irregular migrants in Europe and the United States (pp. 165-183). Abingdon, U.K.: Routledge.
  • Bosworth, M. (2012). Subjectivity and identity in detention: Punishment and society in a global age. Theoretical Criminology, 16(2), 123-140.
  • Bosworth, M. (2013). Can immigration detention be legitimate? Understanding confinement in a global world. In K. F. Aas & M. Bosworth (Eds.), The borders of punishment: migration, citizenship, and social exclusion (pp. 149-165). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Bosworth, M. (2014). Inside immigration detention. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Bosworth, M. (2016). Border criminologies: Assessing the changing architecture of crime and punishment (GDP Working Paper No. 10). Geneva, Switzerland: Global Detention Project.
  • Bosworth, M., & Fili, A. (2016). Immigration detention in Greece and the U.K. In R. Furman, D. Epps, & G. Lamphear (Eds.), Detaining the immigration other: Global and transnational issues (pp. 79-90). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Bosworth, M., Fili, A., & Pickering, S. (2014). Women’s immigration detention in Greece: Gender, control, and capacity. In M. J. Guia, R. Koulish, & V. Mitsilegas (Eds.), Immigration detention, risk, and human rights (pp. 157-170). New York: Springer.
  • Bosworth, M., & Kellezi, B. (2014). Citizenship and belonging in a women’s immigration detention centre. In C. Phillips & C. Webster (Eds.), New directions in race, ethnicity, and crime (pp. 80-96). Abingdon, U.K.: Routledge.
  • Bosworth, M., & Slade, G. (2014). In search of recognition: Gender and staff-detainee relations in a British immigration removal centre. Punishment & Society, 16(2), 169-186.
  • Bosworth, M., & Turnbull, S. (2015a). Immigration detention and the expansion of penal power in the United Kingdom. In K. Reiter & A. Koenig (Eds.), Extreme punishment: Comparative studies in detention, incarceration, and solitary confinement (pp. 50-67). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Bosworth, M., & Turnbull, S. (2015b). Immigration detention, punishment, and the criminalization of migration. In S. Pickering & J. Ham (Eds.), The Routledge handbook on crime and international migration (pp. 91-106). Abingdon, U.K.: Routledge.
  • Broeders, D. (2010). Return to sender: Administrative detention of irregular migrants in Germany and the Netherlands. Punishment & Society, 12(2), 169-186.
  • Bull, M., Schindeler, E., Berkman, D., & Ransley, J. (2013). Sickness in the system of long-term immigration detention. Journal of Refugee Studies, 26(1), 47-68.
  • Burnett, J., & Chebe, F. (2010). Captive labour: Asylum seekers, migrants, and employment in U.K. immigration removal centres. Race & Class, 51(4), 95-103.
  • Bosworth, M., & Turnbull, S. (2015). Immigration detention, punishment, and the criminalization of migration. In S. Pickering & J. Ham (Eds.), The Routledge handbook on crime and international migration (pp. 91-106). Abingdon, U.K.: Routledge.
  • Bosworth, M., & Turnbull, S. (2015a). Immigration detention and the expansion of penal power in the United Kingdom. In K. Reiter & A. Koenig (Eds.), Extreme punishment: Comparative studies in detention, incarceration, and solitary confinement (pp. 50-67). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Broeders, D. (2010). Return to sender: Administrative detention of irregular migrants in Germany and the Netherlands. Punishment & Society, 12(2), 169-186.
  • Campesi, G. (2015). Hindering the deportation machine: An ethnography of power and resistance in immigration detention. Punishment & Society, 17(4), 427-453.
  • Chacón, J. (2014). Immigration detention: No turning back? South Atlantic Quarterly, 113(3), 621-628.
  • Colombo, A. (2013). Foreigners and immigrants in Italy’s penal and administrative detention systems. European Journal of Criminology, 10(6), 746-759.
  • Campesi, G. (2015). Hindering the deportation machine: An ethnography of power and resistance in immigration detention. Punishment & Society, 17(4), 427-453.
  • Chacón, J. (2014). Immigration detention: No turning back? South Atlantic Quarterly, 113(3), 621-628.
  • Cheliotis, L. K. (2013a). Behind the veil of philoxenia: The politics of immigration detention in Greece. European Journal of Criminology, 10(6), 725-745.
  • Cheliotis, L. K. (2013b). Introduction: Immigration detention around Europe. European Journal of Criminology, 10(6), 690-691.
  • Cleveland, J. (2015). Not so short and sweet: Immigration detention in Canada. In A. Nethery & S. J. Silverman (Eds.), Immigration detention: The migration of a policy and its human impact (pp. 79-87). Abingdon, U.K.: Routledge.
  • Coddington, K., & Mountz, A. (2014). Countering isolation with the use of technology: How asylum-seeking detainees on islands in the Indian Ocean use social media to transcend their confinement. Journal of the Indian Ocean Region, 10(1), 97-112.
  • Coffey, G. J., Kaplan, I., Sampson, R. C., & Tucci, M. M. (2010). The meaning and mental health consequences of long-term immigration detention for people seeking asylum. Social Science & Medicine, 70(12), 2070-2079.
  • Cohen, J. (2008). Safe in our hands?: A study of suicide and self-harm in asylum seekers. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 15(4), 235-244.
  • Colombo, A. (2013). Foreigners and immigrants in Italy’s penal and administrative detention systems. European Journal of Criminology, 10(6), 746-759.
  • Conlon, D., & Hiemstra, N. (2014). Examining the everyday micro-economies of migrant detention in the United States. Geographica Helvetica, 69(5), 335-344.
  • Doty, R. L., & Wheatley, E. S. (2013). Private detention and the immigration industrial complex. International Political Sociology, 7(4), 426-443.
  • Fassin, D. (2011). Policing borders, producing boundaries: The governmentality of immigration in dark times. Annual Review of Anthropology, 40, 213-226.
  • Flynn, M. (2014a). How and why immigration detention crossed the globe (GDP Working Paper No. 8). Geneva, Switzerland: Global Detention Project.
  • Flynn, M. (2014b). There and back again: On the diffusion of immigration detention. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 2(3), 165-197.
  • Flynn, M. (2015). Bureaucratic capitalism and the immigration detention complex (GDP Working Paper No. 9). Geneva, Switzerland: Global Detention Project.
  • Furman, R., Epps, D., & Lamphear, G. (2016). Introduction: Global and transnational issues. In R. Furman, D. Epps, & G. Lamphear (Eds.), Detaining the immigration other: Global and transnational issues (pp. 1-14). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Gill, N. (2009). Governmental mobility: The power effects of the movement of detained asylum seekers around Britain’s detention estate. Political Geography, 28(3), 186-196.
  • Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
  • Golash-Boza, T. (2009). The immigration industrial complex: Why we enforce immigration policies destined to fail. Sociology Compass, 3(2), 295-309.
  • Grewcock, M. (2009). Detention, punishment, and children’s rights: An Australian snapshot. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 48(4), 388-400.
  • Griffiths, M. (2013). Living with uncertainty: Indefinite immigration detention. Journal of Legal Anthropology, 1(3), 263-286.
  • Griffiths, M. (2014). Out of time: The temporal uncertainties of refused asylum seekers and immigration detainees. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(12), 1991-2009.
  • Gündo?du, A. (2015). Rightlessness in an age of rights: Hannah Arendt and the contemporary struggles of migrants. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Hall, A. (2010). “These people could be anyone” : Fear, contempt (and empathy) in a British immigration removal centre. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36(6), 881-898.
  • Hall, A. (2012). Border watch: Cultures of immigration, detention, and control. London: Pluto Press.
  • Hassan, L. (2000). Deterrence measures and the preservation of asylum in the United Kingdom and United States. Journal of Refugee Studies, 13(2), 184-204.
  • Hasselberg, I. (2016). Enduring uncertainty: Deportation, punishment, and the everyday life. Oxford: Berghahn Books.
  • Hernández, C. C. G. (2012). The perverse logic of immigration detention: Unraveling the rationality of imprisoning immigrants based on markers of race and class otherness. Columbia Journal of Race and Law, 1(3), 353-364.
  • Hernández, C. C. G. (2014). Immigration detention as punishment. UCLA Law Review, 61(5), 1346-1414.
  • Independent Monitoring Boards. (2016). About us. Retrieved from https://www.imb.org.uk/about-us/.Furman, R., Epps, D., & Lamphear, G. (Eds.). (2016). Detaining the immigration other: Global and transnational issues. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Hall, A. (2012). Border watch: Cultures of immigration, detention and control. London: Pluto Press.
  • Hernández, C. C. G. (2014). Immigration detention as punishment. UCLA Law Review, 61(5), 1346-1414.
  • Leerkes, A., & Broeders, D. (2010). A case of mixed motives?: Formal and informal functions of administrative immigration detention. British Journal of Criminology, 50(5), 830-850.
  • Nethery, A., & Silverman, S. J. (Eds.). (2015). Immigration detention: The migration of a policy and its human impact. London: Routledge.
  • Kaufman, E. (2015). Punish and expel: Border control, nationalism, and the new purpose of the prison. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Khosravi, S. (2009). Sweden: Detention and deportation of asylum seekers. Race & Class, 50(4), 38-56.
  • Klein, A., & Williams, L. (2012). Immigration detention in the community: Research on the experiences of migrants released from detention centres in the U.K. Population, Space, and Place, 18(6), 741-753.
  • Kronick, R., Rousseau, C., & Cleveland, J. (2016). “They cut your wings over here … you can’t do nothing” : Voices of children and parents held in immigration detention in Canada. In R. Furman, D. Epps, & G. Lamphear (Eds.), Detaining the immigrant other: Global and transnational issues (pp. 195-207). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Kudo, S. (2016). Immigration detention in Malaysia: The state of monopoly of (in)security. In R. Furman, D. Epps, & G. Lamphear (Eds.), Detaining the immigration other: Global and transnational issues (pp. 39-51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Le Courant, S., & Kobelinsky, C. (2016). Trapped to the local: The effects of immigration detention in France. In R. Furman, D. Epps, & G. Lamphear (Eds.), Detaining the immigration other: Global and transnational issues (pp. 129-139). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Leerkes, A., & Broeders, D. (2010). A case of mixed motives?: Formal and informal functions of administrative immigration detention. British Journal of Criminology, 50(5), 830-850.
  • Loyd, J. M. (2015). Carceral citizenship in an age of global apartheid. Occasion, 8, 1-15. Retrieved from https://arcade.stanford.edu/occasion_issue/race-space-scale.
  • Mainwaring, C. (2016). Transnational migration and control: Immigration detention on the edge of Europe. In R. Furman, D. Epps, & G. Lamphear (Eds.), Detaining the immigration other: Global and transnational issues (pp. 117-128). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Majcher, I., & de Senarclens, C. (2015). Discipline and punish? Analysis of the purposes of immigration detention in Europe. AmeriQuests, 11(2).
  • Makaremi, C. (2009). Governing borders in France: From extraterritorial to humanitarian confinement. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 24(3), 411-432.
  • Malloch, M. S., & Stanley, E. (2005). The detention of asylum seekers in the U.K.: Representing risk, managing the dangerous. Punishment & Society, 7(1), 53-71.
  • Martin, L. L., & Mitchelson, M. L. (2009). Geographies of detention and imprisonment: Interrogating spatial practices of confinement, discipline, law, and state power. Geography Compass, 3(1), 459-477.
  • McGregor, J. (2009). Narratives and legacies of detention: Zimbabwean asylum seekers’ experiences in Britain. London: University College London.
  • McGregor, J. (2011). Contestations and consequences of deportability: Hunger strikes and the political agency of non-citizens. Citizenship Studies, 15(5), 597-611.
  • McGregor, J. (2012). Rethinking detention and deportability: Removal centres as spaces of religious revival. Political Geography, 31(4), 236-246.
  • Miller, T. A. (2003). Citizenship and severity: Recent immigration reforms and the new penology. Georgetown Immigration Law Journal, 17, 611-666.
  • Mountz, A. (2011). The enforcement archipelago: Detention, haunting, and asylum on islands. Political Geography, 30(3), 118-128.
  • Nah, A. M. (2015). Illegality and its uncertainties: Immigration detention in Malaysia. In A. Nethery & S. J. Silverman (Eds.), Immigration detention: The migration of a policy and its human impact (pp. 125-134). Abingdon, U.K.: Routledge.
  • Nethery, A., Rafferty-Brown, B., & Taylor, S. (2013). Exporting detention: Australia-funded immigration detention in Indonesia. Journal of Refugee Studies, 26(1), 88-109.
  • Nethery, A., & Silverman, S. J. (Eds.). (2015). Immigration detention: The migration of a policy and its human impact. London: Routledge.
  • Parr, A. (2005). The deterritorializing language of child detainees: Self-harm or embodied graffiti? Childhood, 12(3), 281-299.
  • Penovic, T., & Dastyari, A. (2016). Harm and accountability in transnational detention environments: The case of Australia’s extraterritorial processing of asylum seekers. In R. Furman, D. Epps, & G. Lamphear (Eds.), Detaining the immigration other: Global and transnational issues (pp. 141-153). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Pichou, M. (2016). Reception or detention centres? The detention of migrants and the new EU “hotspot” approach in the light of the European Convention on Human Rights. Critical Quarterly for Legislation and Law, 2, 114-131.
  • Pickering, S., & Lambert, C. (2001). Immigration detention centres, human rights, and criminology in Australia. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 13(2), 219-223.
  • Pickering, S., & Weber, L. (2014). New deterrence scripts in Australia’s rejuvenated offshore detention regime for asylum seekers. Law & Social Inquiry, 39(4), 1006-1026.
  • Pratt, A. (2005). Securing borders: Detention and deportation in Canada. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
  • Puggioni, R. (2014). Speaking through the body: Detention and bodily resistance in Italy. Citizenship Studies, 18(5), 562-577.
  • Robjant, K., Hassan, R., & Katona, C. (2009). Mental health implications of detaining asylum seekers: Systematic review. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 194(4), 306-312.
  • Robjant, K., Robbins, I., & Senior, V. (2009). Psychological distress amongst immigration detainees: A cross-sectional questionnaire study. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 48(3), 275-286.
  • Sampson, R. C. (2015). Does detention deter?: Reframing immigration detention in response to irregular migration (IDC Briefing Paper No. 1). Melbourne, Australia: International Detention Coalition.
  • Sasseen, S. (1996). Beyond sovereignty: Immigration policy making today. Social Justice, 23(3), 9-20.
  • Sexton, L. (2015). Penal subjectivities: Developing a theoretical framework for penal consciousness. Punishment & Society, 17(1), 114-136.
  • Silverman, S. J., & Massa, E. (2012). Why immigration detention is unique. Population, Space, and Place, 18(6), 677-686.
  • Simon, J. (1998). Refugees in a carceral age: The rebirth of immigration prisons in the United States. Public Culture, 10(2), 577-607.
  • Skulan, C. (2006). Australia’s mandatory detention of unauthorized asylum seekers: History, politics, and analysis under international law. Georgetown Immigration Law Journal, 21(1), 61-110.
  • Stefanelli, J. N. (2011). Whose rule of law? An analysis of the U.K.’s decision not to opt-in to the EU asylum procedures and reception conditions directives. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 60(4), 1055-1064.
  • Stumpf, J. (2006). The crimmigration crisis: Immigrants, crime, and sovereign power. American University Law Review, 56(2), 367-419.
  • Sutton, R., & Vigneswaran, D. (2011). A Kafkaesque state: Deportation and detention in South Africa. Citizenship Studies, 15(5), 627-642.
  • Sykes, G. (1958). The society of captives: A study of a maximum security prison. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Simon, J. (1998). Refugees in a carceral age: The rebirth of immigration prisons in the United States. Public Culture, 10(2), 577-607.
  • Weber, L. (2002). The detention of asylum seekers: 20 reasons why criminologists should care. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 14(1), 9-30.
  • Welch, M., & Schuster, L. (2005). Detention of asylum seekers in the U.K. and U.S.A.: Deciphering noisy and quiet constructions. Punishment & Society, 7(4), 397-417.
  • Wilsher, D. (2011). Immigration detention: Law, history, politics. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
  • Tabak, S. (2016). LGBTI migrants in a global world. In R. Furman, D. Epps, & G. Lamphear (Eds.), Detaining the immigration other: Global and transnational issues (pp. 27-38). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Trujillo-Pagan, N. (2013). Emphasizing the “complex” in the “immigration industrial complex.” Critical Sociology, 40(1), 29-46.
  • Turnbull, S. (2016). “Stuck in the middle” : Waiting and uncertainty in immigration detention. Time & Society, 25(1), 61-79.
  • Turney, C. (2011). Give me your tired, your poor, and your queer: The need and potential for advocacy for LGBTQ immigrant detainees. UCLA Law Review, 58(5), 1343-1388.
  • Ugelvik, S., & Ugelvik, T. (2013). Immigration control in Ultima Thule: Detention and exclusion, Norwegian style. European Journal of Criminology, 10(6), 709-724.
  • Weber, L. (2002). The detention of asylum seekers: 20 reasons why criminologists should care. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 14(1), 9-30.
  • Welch, M. (2014). Economic man and diffused sovereignty: A critique of Australia’s asylum regime. Crime, Law, and Social Change, 61(1), 81-107.
  • Welch, M., & Schuster, L. (2005). Detention of asylum seekers in the U.K. and U.S.A.: Deciphering noisy and quiet constructions. Punishment & Society, 7(4), 397-417.
  • Williams, L. (2015). From immigration detention to destitution. Criminal Justice Matters, 99(1), 12-13.
  • Wolf, S. (2016). Migration detention in Mexico: Human rights denied. In R. Furman, D. Epps, & G. Lamphear (Eds.), Detaining the immigration other: Global and transnational issues (pp. 67-78). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Zedner, L. (2016). Penal subversions: When is a punishment not punishment, who decides, and on what grounds? Theoretical Criminology, 20(1), 3-20.

Leave a Comment