| Title |
Managing crime through migration law in Australia and the United States: a comparative analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Comparative Migration Studies, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40878-017-0056-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Khanh Hoang, Sudrishti Reich |
| Abstract |
This article examines the intertwining of migration law and criminal law - termed 'crimmigration' by scholars - in Australia and the United States of America, and its implications for non-citizens who engage in criminal conduct. Our comparison of the two systems demonstrates that the laws and policies in both jurisdictions are similar to a significant degree. Both have strong exclusionary policies characterised by sweeping visa cancellation/removal powers, a heavy focus on enforcement, and limited review rights. In Australia, legislative amendments in 2014 have given the executive greater powers to cancel visas and remove non-citizens on character grounds as a means of ensuring national security and public safety. This has coincided with a new law enforcement body created within the Australian Department of Immigration. These changes reflect a repurposing of migration law as a tool for managing criminal threats based on the concept of 'risk management'. Drawing on the experience of the United States - where such a 'risk management' approach is entrenched - we query the utility of this shift and highlight the potential pitfalls of pursuing such a policy for Australia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 8% |
| Central African Republic | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Kenya | 1 | 8% |
| France | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 58% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 13 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 11 | 31% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 13 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 April 2019.
All research outputs
#4,809,771
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Comparative Migration Studies
#144
of 295 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,057
of 327,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Comparative Migration Studies
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 295 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,745 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.