The chapter focuses on the processes of political differentiation as triggered by the refugee crisis of 2015. It maps them on an empirical level by studying the reactions of major political actors in the Czech Republic. Furthermore, the chapter abstracts a general theory of political differentiation, i.e. political 'othering'. It shows how the degree of differentiation can be approximated to a strong anti-liberal position mirroring the dichotomy between friend and foe. Outcomes of the differentiation processes are confronted with selected principles of modern constitutionalism, i.e. the principles of human dignity and democratic governance, that are endangered by the persistence of an extreme degree of hostile group differentiation.

The Schengen Agreement was meant to create a 'borderless Europe'. Yet, from the outset, countries have had a very ambivalent relationship to what Schengen stood for politically – an enhancement of the economy – and what it meant in practice: not being able to properly monitor the movement of flows of people across intra-Schengen borders. Whereas there should be no borders for so-called bonafide, or trusted, travellers, the lack of border control was seen as problematic in keeping out the 'crimmigrant other': the irregular migrant, the criminal migrant, the terrorist migrant. By investing in various modalities of the policing of movement and mobility, one could say that the border is everywhere in an area that was meant to be borderless and that the process of 'othering' is central to its functioning. By bringing together the literature on 'othering' and 'bordering', this chapter considers the utility of borders not just as sites of enquiry in their own right but as ‘epistemological viewpoints’ from which to analyse the processes of differential 'othering' that are at the core of bordering practices in intra-Schengen border zones.

EU citizens living in the United Kingdom and EU citizens-qua-UK nationals living in other Member States following the referendum on the UK’s continued membership of the EU on 23 June 2016 became ‘the numbered’ 'others'. Their identities were redefined overnight not by them, but by state authorities and their co-EU citizens. In this chapter, I trace the process of 'othering' of EU citizens, which had started several years before the referendum in 2016, and unravel the key moments, forces, and strategies that made it possible by utilising a discursive theoretical approach. I argue that the quest for EU citizens’ rights in the UK under Brexit, just like the quest for migrants’ rights, is a quest as much for the realisation of the fundamental status of Union citizenship as for the effectiveness of the principle of respect for human dignity.

This chapter explores the different levels of ‘legal otherness’ in European Union law in the context of expulsion and entry bans. It is based on the premise that deportability constitutes a clear indicator of 'otherness' and that the lack of a secure residence status marks an individual as an outsider. This contribution examines the impact of a foreigner’s nationality and the duration of her or his residence in the ‘host’ Member State on the level of ‘legal otherness’ as it emanates from the person’s protection against expulsion. The different levels of 'otherness' are analysed against the background of the rationale that a secure residence status has an inclusive effect and is conducive to the foreigner’s integration. A low level of protection against expulsion and an insecure residence status, by contrast, have exclusionary effects and are capable of hampering the foreigner’s integration into the society of the ‘host’ Member State.

This chapter argues that non-discrimination law can and should offer enhanced protection against legal ‘othering’ of foreign nationals in the EU. It starts from the premise that some states offer much better value, in terms of rights, resources, and ultimately life chances, than others. Once this unequal distribution is brought into the picture, it becomes clear that nationality functions as a mechanism of exclusion vis-à-vis nationals of ‘low value’ states (and stateless persons) whose access to rights and resources is limited both in countries of origin and in ‘high value’ states where they are not recognised as (full) members. Relying on recent theories of non-discrimination law that focus on stigmatisation as a root cause of discrimination, this chapter proposes to combine increased scrutiny of nationality as a stigma-carrying attribute with due regard for its legitimate function in maintaining viable political communities.

This chapter brings together the findings of the other chapters and emphasises some common trends that came back repeatedly in the preceding chapters. The chapter starts with the general rigidity and stickiness of legal norms in the area of immigration and asylum. As a result, procedures, implementation, but also interpretation of these norms are changed more often than the norms themselves. On the EU level, the phenomenon called ‘reverse harmonization’, which led to vague legal norms, contributes to the discretion to install procedures on the national level leading to deliberate bureaucratic 'othering'. The chapter also highlights economic and cultural 'othering' as common treads throughout the book. The chapter concludes with some thoughts on what the treatment of the 'other' says about European Societies and what can be done to stop 'othering'.

The State’s legal obligation towards refugees comprises granting protection and conferring post-determination rights. This chapter queries how the UK discharges its legal obligation to facilitate refugees’ engagement with work and whether it contributes towards their ‘othering’. It examines the Syrian Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme (VPRS) as a case-study, assessing how ‘resettled’ refugees access support to labour market integration through various organisations and actors, comparing the support provided to them with the assistance available to ‘recognised’ refugees. The latter are those who have reached the UK by their own endeavours, applied for asylum, and been granted refugee status. The study has demonstrated how diverse networks of organisations and state actors facilitate or inhibit refugees’ access to the labour market, counterbalancing State actions on integration.

The market logic of the internal market has historically meant that EU citizens engaged in economic activity in a host-Member State obtain a secure form of lawful residence and far-reaching rights. For economically inactive citizens there is a less secure status in terms of residence, as well as more limited and conditional rights. The traditional case law of the Court of Justice of the EU has had the effect of protecting EU migrant workers in lower-paid employment. However, in the light of recent legal developments, some have suggested that this traditional position is being undermined. This chapter assesses the extent to which the EU legal system excludes those EU migrant workers on the fringes of economic activity. It begins by assessing how the ‘working proletariat’ should be understood in the 21st Century. It then analyses the development of the law of freedom of movement for workers and EU citizenship. Concretely, it claims that the introduction of Union citizenship, rather than offering a safety net for EU migrants regardless of their legal status, in some cases actually resulted in less protection than previously for EU migrant workers. Finally, it analyses the legal and wider implications of the exclusionary system.

This chapter places the social process of 'othering' in the context or regulation of immigration and asylum. The chapter also introduces the structure and content of the individual parts of the book as well as their chapters.

This chapter highlights the potential of domestic constitutional law to curtail the legal 'othering' of non-citizens at the national level, using Ireland as a case study. The chapter begins by looking at Irish national identity as enshrined in the text of the 1937 Constitution. It finds that, despite the strong Catholic and nationalist influences on the constitutional text, it should be flexible enough to accommodate new perceptions of Irishness in what is now an immigrant-receiving society. The second part of the chapter explores domestic constitutional case-law on the rights of non-citizens, focusing on a recent Supreme Court decision which clarifies that constitutional rights must extend to non-citizens where to find otherwise would contravene constitutional principles of dignity and equality. It is argued that this reasoning effectively collapses the distinction between citizen and non-citizen as rights-bearers in the constitutional order.