What is the Right to Exclude Immigrants?

It is normally taken for granted that states have a right to control immigration into their territory. When immigration is raised as a normative issue two questions become salient, one about what the right to exclude is, and one about whether and how it might be justified. This paper considers the first question. The paper starts by noting that standard debates about immigration have not addressed what the right to exclude is. Standard debates about immigration furthermore tend to result either in fairly strong cases for open borders or in denials that considerations of justice apply to immigration at all, which results in state discretion positions. This state of debate is both theoretically unsatisfactory and normatively implausible. The paper therefore explores an alternative approach to the right to exclude immigrants from the perspective of recent debates about the territorial rights of states. The right to exclude claimed by states is analysed and it is shown to differ both conceptually and normatively from rights to impose political authority within a territory. The paper finally indicates how this analysis might broaden the focus of debates about immigration and suggest alternative regimes of migration regulation the possibility of which is obscured by traditional justice approaches.     

Psychopathy in a forensic sample – the factor structure of the PCL:SV in a Danish forensic sample

The research literature reveals an ongoing debate regarding the most appropriate conceptualization of psychopathic personality disorder. Specifically, it is discussed to what degree antisocial behavior is part of the conceptualization of the psychopathy construct and what constitutes the best factor model of the Psychopathy Checklist scales. The aim of the present study is to consider the underlying factor structure of the PCL:SV (Psychopathy Checklist Screening Version) in a Danish sample as well as considering the role of antisocial behavior in the psychopathy construct. Data from a Danish forensic patient sample (N = 225) was used and item response theory (IRT), aonfirmatory factor analyses (CFA) and structural equations model (SEM) analyses were carried out. Overall, the findings suggest appropriate item and model fit for the PCL:SV as well as superiority of the three‐factor model over the four‐factor model. The results are discussed in relation to the broader concept of personality disorder as well as clinical practice in regards to violence risk assessments and treatment of psychopathy.