Immigration Enforcement, Sovereignty, and the Rule of Law_ The “Integrazione o ReImmigrazione” Paradigm
カートのアイテムが多すぎます
ご購入は五十タイトルがカートに入っている場合のみです。
カートに追加できませんでした。
しばらく経ってから再度お試しください。
ウィッシュリストに追加できませんでした。
しばらく経ってから再度お試しください。
ほしい物リストの削除に失敗しました。
しばらく経ってから再度お試しください。
ポッドキャストのフォローに失敗しました
ポッドキャストのフォロー解除に失敗しました
Immigration Enforcement, Sovereignty, and the Rule of Law_ The “Integrazione o ReImmigrazione” Paradigm
-
ナレーター：
-
著者：
概要
My name is Fabio Loscerbo, I am an Italian immigration lawyer, and in this podcast I discuss migration from a legal and institutional perspective.
The purpose of this project is not political advocacy, but legal and policy analysis. In much of Europe, immigration is still addressed primarily through economic or humanitarian lenses, while its institutional dimension — sovereignty, enforcement, and the effectiveness of legal decisions — remains underdeveloped.
The paradigm I propose, known as “Integrazione o ReImmigrazione,” must be clearly distinguished from ideological or political notions such as “remigration.” ReImmigrazione is not a translated term and should not be translated. It is a legal concept developed within the Italian constitutional and administrative framework, and it refers to a structured, lawful return process grounded in individual assessment, due process, and judicial oversight.
Within the “Integrazione o ReImmigrazione” paradigm, a foreign national may lawfully remain in the country when genuine integration occurs. Integration is understood not merely as economic participation, but as a legal and social relationship with the host state, involving compliance with the legal order, respect for fundamental rules, and effective participation in civic life. Where such integration does not occur, ReImmigrazione provides a lawful and institutional pathway for return, without arbitrariness and within the rule of law.
A central institutional problem in Europe is the absence of a true immigration enforcement body. Immigration governance is largely entrusted to administrative offices, which are competent for documentation and procedural processing but lack the capacity to ensure territorial control or execute return decisions effectively.
This is why the U.S. model, and particularly the role of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, is analytically significant. In the United States, immigration enforcement is treated as a component of internal security and is carried out by a federal law enforcement agency operating within a defined legal framework, subject to judicial review, institutional accountability, and constitutional constraints.
The incident that occurred in Minneapolis on January 24, 2026, which has received wide media coverage, should be considered within this institutional context. Any evaluation of individual conduct properly belongs to the courts. From a systemic perspective, however, the episode illustrates a core principle: immigration enforcement is a public function of the state, not a mere administrative activity, and it cannot be structurally delegitimized due to individual cases.
In European debates, enforcement is often viewed as inherently problematic, while administrative management is assumed to be sufficient. This approach produces a legal system in which norms formally exist but lack effective implementation, thereby undermining both legal certainty and the credibility of integration policies.
The “Integrazione o ReImmigrazione” paradigm is grounded in a fundamental legal premise: integration without enforceability is not legally meaningful. Integration is not only a social process; it is a legal relationship between the individual and the state, involving rights and obligations. When that relationship fails, the state must retain the institutional capacity to act.
For this reason, the existence of a specialized immigration enforcement body is not a political preference but an institutional necessity. The U.S. experience demonstrates that such a body can operate within a constitutional system, under judicial control, while ensuring that immigration law is effectively enforced.
The question facing Europe today is therefore institutional, not ideological: whether immigration will continue to be managed as a purely administrative phenomenon, or whether states will reclaim the tools necessary to give concrete effect to their legal decisions.
That is the core issue addressed by the “Integrazione o ReImmigrazione” paradigm.
まだレビューはありません