Over the last decade, states have increasingly emphasised the importance of integration, and translated it into legal regulations that demand integration from immigrants. This paper criticises a specific aspect to this development, namely the tendency to make permanent residency dependent on language skills and, as such, seeks to raise doubts as to the moral acceptability of the requirement of linguistic integration. The paper starts by arguing that immigrants after a relatively short period of time acquire a moral claim to permanent (...) residency in their host country. Accordingly, states may not limit residency at their discretion. Nevertheless, three arguments may seem promising for defending the requirement of linguistic integration: that the immigrants’ moral claim conflicts with a stronger moral claim on the part of the larger society, and this makes an infringement of the immigrants’ claim proportionate; that language requirements may be legally demanded as a precondition for permanent residency for the immigrants’ own sake; and that language requirements are defensible, as far as immigrants may be understood to have consented to such regulation upon entry to the country. This paper argues that all three must be rejected. (shrink)

Although the moral foundations of voting rights regulations have been the subject of widespread scrutiny, there is one aspect of the debate which has gone largely unquestioned and is currently accepted in every state’s actual voting rights regulations. This is the requirement of prior residence, which stipulates that immigrants are granted the right to vote only once they have lived in the host country for a certain period of time. It is this requirement I call into question in this paper. (...) Taking up the most plausible justifications for this requirement, I aim to put substantial pressure on its moral acceptability by arguing that it is not directly grounded by any of the principles that are currently defended as a means to determine the demos, nor a proxy for some other morally relevant feature, nor a warrantor for abilities held to be significant for the right to vote. (shrink)

This essay investigates the possibilities and limits of interdisciplinary research into terrorism. It is shown that approaches that combine philosophy and international law are necessary, and when such an approach needs to be adopted. However, it is also important not to underestimate how much of a challenge is posed by the absence of agreement concerning the definition of terrorism, and also by the structural differences in the way the two disciplines address the problem and formulate the issues. Not least, the (...) discussion enables us to reach conclusions as to how terrorism research that combines philosophy and international law in particular, and interdisciplinary research into terrorism in general, can be meaningfully implemented. The individual aspects are clarified on the basis of the discussion surrounding justified measures for combating terrorism and the justification of the targeted killing of terrorists. (shrink)

Dieses Kapitel gibt einen Überblick über philosophische Debatten zum Umgang mit menschlicher Mobilität über nationalstaatliche Grenzen. Dabei wird zum einen auf die Diskussion über ein staatliches Recht auf Ausschluss bzw. ein individuelles Recht auf Einwanderung eingegangen, zum anderen wird die Frage beleuchtet, wer aufgrund einer besonderen Bedrohungslage im Herkunftsland einen Anspruch auf Aufnahme hat und wie Pflichten zur Aufnahme von Geflüchteten unter den Staaten zu verteilen sind.

Was ist gerecht? Ist gerecht, was dem Gesetz entspricht? Wie sind gesellschaftliche Güter gerecht zu verteilen? Wie ist globale Gerechtigkeit zu erreichen? Und wie die Gerechtigkeit gegenüber zukünftigen Generationen? Das Handbuch stellt die Geschichte des Gerechtigkeitsbegriffs dar, erläutert die unterschiedlichen Gerechtigkeitstypen und deren philosophische Grundlagen wie Utilitarismus, Diskursethik sowie Kritische Theorie und betrachtet die Gerechtigkeit im Kontext von Moral, Menschenwürde und Menschenrechten. Das Schlusskapitel beleuchtet aktuelle Anwendungsfragen wie Generationengerechtigkeit, Gesundheitsversorgung und Lohngerechtigkeit.