By Dr. Merrill Matthews Institute for Policy Innovation.
Do we have a fundamental human right to live anywhere in the world we choose?
Purchase College economics professor Sandy Ikeda thinks so and makes his case in Immigration Is a Fundamental Human Right"
published by the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE).
To understand his position you first need to know that many libertarians see national boundaries as arbitrary constructs and thus people should be able to move to any country they choose just as Americans can move to any state or city they choose.
Ikeda pins his argument on the freedom of association: Since people should be free to associate with whomever they choose they should be free to engage in that association wherever (i.e. any country) they choose.
He writes The state did not create the freedom of association; free association is prior to the state and prior to the states artificial boundaries."
Identifying fundamental human rights is very subjective but even if hes correct Ikeda never addresses the biggest problem: location.
If several people are exercising their right to associate in a restaurant or bar at closing time does the restaurant owner have the right to tell them its time to leave? Of course.
If several people were to break into Ikedas house and begin associating with each other would he be infringing their rights to tell them they were not welcome and had to leaveand turn to the power of the state (i.e. police) if they refused to vacate? No he would not.
The intruders are infringing his rights not the other way around.
Even though many libertarians view nationalas well as state county and cityborders as arbitrary they are no more arbitrary than the borders of our homes and businesses. Governments have often entered into contracts or gone to war to establish and protect their borders.
And speaking of contracts about
40 percent of illegal immigrants are people who have overstayed their visasa voluntary contract in which the visitor agrees to leave by a certain date. Should they have a right to stay even if doing so breaks a contract?
Ironically technology may have made Ikedas free association defense even less relevant. People are free to Skypei.e. associatewith anyone anywhere without crossing national borders.
If my property rights allow me to tell people they cannot come into my house or that they have to leave if they have overstayed their welcome so should governments.
Now just because governments have the right to say who can and cant reside within their borders doesnt mean they should be overly restrictive. The U.S. and its economy have benefited immensely from immigration. And one of the reasons we need immigration reform is so those benefits can continue.
But to say that the freedom of association should allow people to associate wherever they choose denies yet another fundamental human right: property rights. And no libertarian should be guilty of that error.
Todays PolicyByte was written by Dr. Merrill Matthews resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation.
