Chapter 9 addresses two important questions: How open should states be to more migrants? What responsibilities do states and citizens have in connection with reducing migration injustices It also addresses key objections to the account of migration justice and its core recommendations. A legitimate state system must include rights to a fair process for determining migrants’ rights, especially concerning rights to admission and to remain. While this would generally lead to an opening of borders, important constraints on such opening would still remain, e.g., those relevant to respecting, protecting, and fulfilling the human rights of those already residing on the territory. The position offered is a human-rights oriented middle ground between the positions of those who argue for open borders and their critics. The chapter also returns to the issue of whether our state system can currently be regarded as legitimate. As matters stand, the state system cannot yet pass a basic legitimacy test, but Brock highlights what we must do if we aspire to a legitimate state system capable of supporting justice for people on the move.

Chapter 3 seeks a justification for states’ claims to have rights to self-determination that entail the right to control admission to their territory. States assume they have certain rights (such as rights to admit and exclude from their territory) and that agents of the state may act in ways that privilege the interests of their citizens. What justification can be offered for these arrangements? Importantly, what compelling justification can be offered to those who currently find themselves beyond those borders and who wish to cross them? In seeking a justification, we discover that for states to have robust rights to self-determination within a state system, they will also have many responsibilities. A state’s ability to exercise political power legitimately depends on its respecting human rights adequately and cooperating in a host of trans-border activities and institutions that have as their aim securing robust arrangements capable of effective human rights protection. Performance on both these dimensions affects whether we have a legitimate state system, along with whether there are adequate contingency arrangements in place to deal with important shortfalls.