본문 바로가기
  • Home
Basic Search

Liberal Debates on Immigration Regulation and the Reality of Accepting Foreign Immigrants in Immigration Ethics

  • Legal Theory & Practice Review
  • Abbr : LTPR
  • 2025, 13(4), pp.99~186
  • Publisher : The Korea Society for Legal Theory and Practice Inc.
  • Research Area : Social Science > Law
  • Received : November 10, 2025
  • Accepted : November 26, 2025
  • Published : November 30, 2025

Jongho Kim 1

1호서대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

While the liberal debate on immigration regulation primarily focuses on individual freedom and rights and economic efficiency, the reality of accepting foreign immigrants is complicated by a variety of factors, including socioeconomic burdens, cultural conflicts, and security concerns. The liberal debate on immigration regulation revolves around the conflict between national sovereignty and universal moral obligations. While liberal nationalists emphasize the right to control borders and maintain social cohesion, liberal globalists advocate for greater freedom of movement and often view the accidental occurrence of being born in a wealthy country as a source of injustice. These debates address practical issues such as the contributions and challenges immigrants pose, the burden on the welfare state, the demands of the labor market, and the moral obligation to address poverty and human rights violations. Liberalism prioritizes individual freedom and rights, and thus takes the following stance on immigration: many liberals oppose immigration control policies. This is because free trade and an open economy are believed to guarantee individuals’ freedom of economic activity and ultimately increase economic efficiency. The freedom to move and work across borders is considered an extension of basic economic freedom. Liberal egalitarians argue that individuals’ birthplace is merely a coincidence and that they have the right to equal opportunities regardless of their country of origin. Therefore, they tend to view the right to migrate as a fundamental human right. In liberalism, the state is viewed as a means of protecting individual freedom and rights, and should not excessively interfere with individual values ​​or freedom of movement. Contrary to this liberal ideal, the reality of accepting immigrants faces various challenges and conflicts. Among the arguments against accepting immigrants, there is the argument that “the welfare of our country’s marginalized groups should take priority.” There are also concerns that an influx of immigrants could lead to job losses or lower wages for local residents. As seen in other countries, including Europe, there are vague concerns about social unrest and increased crime rates due to the influx of immigrants, which can lead to anti-immigrant sentiment. The influx of immigrants often leads to conflicts stemming from cultural differences, or immigrants themselves face difficulties integrating into society due to language barriers, prejudice, and discrimination. The perception that multiculturalism policies have failed is also a real problem. Political leaders sometimes advocate hardline anti-immigration policies, but in reality, they often adjust immigration policies pragmatically to meet economic needs, such as securing essential workers for industries. This demonstrates the disconnect between ideology and reality. Policymakers often face difficult ethical choices, balancing morally valuable objectives, such as a state’s right to exclude, with their moral obligations to potential immigrants. In conclusion, while the liberal stance on immigration regulation emphasizes universal human rights and economic freedom, the actual process of accepting immigrants constantly clashes with complex, realistic issues such as national sentiment, economic impact, and social integration.

Statistics

  • 356 Viewed
  • 0 Downloaded

Tools

Issue List

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2025 are currently being built.

Basic Search Advanced Search