Global Crimmigration Trends

Part of the Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice book series (IUSGENT, volume 81)


Crimmigration, generally defined, is the increased entanglement of criminal and immigration procedures. Scholars have been observing this trend in the United States, Australia, and various European countries, as well as on other continents. Historically, states handled immigration infractions through civil or administrative systems separate from criminal law. However, in response to increases in migration and mobility, the politicisation of this topic, and a cultural shift in how receiving countries perceive immigrants, immigration and criminal law have become more intertwined. This has increased the number of people processed in immigration systems, detained, and deported. These changes have led to alarming consequences that are incidents of migrant criminalisation—inequality, xenophobia, and a widespread assault on the rights and dignity of migrants.


  1. Adida CL (2014) Immigrant exclusion and insecurity in Africa: coethnic strangers. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. African Refugee Development Center (ARDC) (2016) Untold stories of success.
  3. Akbari AR (2015) Explaining crimmigration in Indonesia: a discourse of the fight against people smuggling, irregular migration control, and symbolic criminalization. Indonesia Law Rev 3:276–290Google Scholar
  4. Amnesty International (2018, June 18) Israel: African asylum-seeker deportations and ‘voluntary’ transfers are forced and illegal.
  5. Badalič V (2018) Tunisia’s role in the EU external migration policy: crimmigration law, illegal practices, and their impact on human rights. J Int Migr Integr 1–16. Accessed 13 Nov 2018
  6. Bier D (2017, August 14) A dozen times Trump equated his travel ban with a Muslim ban. Cato Institute.
  7. Bowling B (2013) Epilogue: the borders of punishment: towards a criminology of mobility. In: Franko Aas K, Bosworth M (eds) The borders of punishment: migration, citizenship, and social exclusion. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  8. Cassarino J-P (2014) Channelled policy transfers: EU-Tunisia interactions on migration matters. Eur J Migr Law 16(1):97–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Danisi C (2017) Taking the ‘Union’ out of ‘EU’: the EU-Turkey statement on the Syrian refugee crisis as an agreement between states under international law. EJIL Talk.
  10. Den Heijer M, Spijkerboer T (2016) Is the EU-Turkey refugee and migration deal a treaty? European Area of Freedom Security & Justice, FREE Group.
  11. Edelman A (2018, June 20) Trump signs order stopping his policy of separating families at the border, NBC.
  12. European Commission Recommendation of 7.3.2017 on making returns more effective when implementing the Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, C (2017) 1600 final.
  13. European Union Fundamental Rights Agency (2014) Criminalisation of migrants in an irregular situation and of persons engaging with them.
  14. Freier LF, Arcarazo DA (2015, June 17) South America’s moves to liberalize irregular migration are in stark contrast to the punitive and fatal policies of the U.S. and Europe. LSE USCentre.
  15. Franko Aas K, Gundhus HOI (2014) Policing humanitarian borderlands: Frontex, human rights and the precariousness of life. Br J Criminol 55(1):1–18. Scholar
  16. Gatti M (2016) The EU-Turkey statement: a treaty that violates democracy (Part 1 of 2). EJIL Talk.
  17. Global Detention Project, Austria country profile. Accessed 14 Sep 2018
  18. Global Detention Project.
  19. Human Rights Watch (2018, March 26) Turkey: mass deportations of Syrians.
  20. Johnson J (2015) Trump calls for total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States, Washington Post, 7 December 2015.
  21. Lind D (2018, June 15) The Trump administration’s separation of families at the border, explained. Vox.
  22. Mătușescu C (2016) Considerations on the legal nature and validity of the EU-Turkey refugee deal. Int J Law Jurisprud Online Semiannually Publ VI(special issue):91–101Google Scholar
  23. McKenzie J, Hazmath R (2013) Deterring the ‘boat people’: explaining the Australian government’s people swap response to asylum seekers. Aust J Polit Sci 48(4):417–430. Scholar
  24. Missbach A (2015) Troubled transit: asylum seekers stuck in Indonesia. ISEAS-Yusof Ishak InstituteGoogle Scholar
  25. Provine DM et al (2016) Policing immigrants: local law enforcement on the front lines. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ramachandran S (1999) Of boundaries and border crossings: undocumented Bangladeshi ‘infiltrators’ and the hegemony of Hindu nationalism in India. Int J Postcolonial Stud 1(2):235–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosenbloom RE (2016) Policing sex, policing immigrants: what crimmigration’s past can tell us about its present and its future. Calif Law Rev 104:149–200Google Scholar
  28. Ruhrmann H, Fitzgerald D (2016, Sept) The externalization of Europe’s borders in the refugee crisis, 2015–2016. Center for Comparative Immigration Studies. Accessed 13 Nov 2018
  29. Sager A (2018, June 12) The perversity of external immigration enforcement.
  30. Stumpf JP (2013) The Crimmigration crisis: immigrants, crime, and sovereign power. In: Dowling JA, Inda JX (eds) Governing immigration through crime. stanford social sciences. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, pp 59–76Google Scholar
  31. Svirnovskiy SY (2017) Finding a right to remain: immigration, deportation, and due process. New J Law Soc Policy 12:32–77Google Scholar
  32. The Guardian (2017, Nov 14) EU’s policy of helping Libya intercept migrants is ‘inhuman,’ says UN.
  33. UNHCR (2018, June 25) Global trends: forced displacement in 2017Google Scholar
  34. US Supreme Court, Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U.S. ___ (2018a) at *28 (Sotomayor dissenting).
  35. US Supreme Court, Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U.S. ___ (2018b).
  36. Vasquez Y (2015) Constructing crimmigration: Latino subordination in a “post-racial” world. Faculty Articles and Other Publications. Paper 254.
  37. Vasquez Y (2017) Crimmigration: the missing piece of criminal justice reform. Univ Rich Law Rev 51:1093–1147Google Scholar
  38. Zender L (2013) Is the criminal law only for citizens? In: Franko Aas K, Bosworth M (eds) The borders of punishment: migration, citizenship, and social exclusion. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  39. Ziegler R (2015) No asylum for ‘infiltrators’: the legal predicament of Eritrean and Sudanese nationals in Israel. Immigr Asylum Natl Law 29(2):172–191Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Peace InstituteLjubljanaSlovenia
  2. 2.University of Chicago Law SchoolChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations