Abstracts
Abstract
Drawing from ethnographic research conducted with binational heterosexual couples negotiating their legitimacy in the face of immigration bureaucracy in Belgium and Italy, I explore the interplay between marriage migration governmentality and personal subjectivities. In a context of increased political scrutiny, I illustrate how binational couples wield their intimacy to become and stay legal; and how their experiences of the bureaucratic encounters impact on both partners’ agency, producing swinging emotions and improving their legal culture. In Belgium and Italy, marriage to a citizen remains a pathway towards securing residence for the migrant partner. Hence, in both countries these formalities, that I frame as a network of bordering practices, are increasingly – but differently – policed defining divergent marriage migration regimes but similar shared migratory careers for the couples. The potency of the legal-bureaucratic culture fashions the couples’ journey through immigration law and its street-level implementation. Nevertheless, beyond the opportunity structures and nationally anchored constraints, the analysis demonstrates that the partners’ agency similarly emerges from the migration management at large, their personal legal status and biographical resources, and interactions with intermediaries at the margin of immigration bureaucracy. Such agency – triggered by intimate intentions and expectations – is contingent and relational.
Keywords:
- binational couples,
- bureaucracy,
- agency,
- paperwork,
- bordering practices,
- Belgium,
- Italy
Résumé
Sur la base d’un travail de terrain ethnographique auprès de couples hétérosexuels binationaux négociant leur légitimité face à la bureaucratie de l’immigration en Belgique et en Italie, j’explore l’interaction entre la gouvernementalité de la migration de mariage et les subjectivités individuelles. Dans un contexte de surveillance politique accrue, je montre comment les couples binationaux utilisent leur intimité pour entrer et rester dans la légalité et comment l’expérience des rencontres bureaucratiques influe sur l’agentivité des deux partenaires, produisant en eux des émotions changeantes et améliorant leur culture juridique. En Belgique comme en Italie, le mariage avec un citoyen reste pour le partenaire migrant un moyen d’obtenir le statut de résident. Par conséquent, dans les deux pays, ces formalités, que je décris comme une frontière-réseau, sont de plus en plus contrôlées, bien que de manières différentes. Ce contrôle définit des régimes de migration de mariage divergents, mais des carrières migratoires communes pour les couples. La force de la culture juridico-bureaucratique façonne la manière dont les couples composent avec la loi sur l’immigration et son application sur le terrain. Néanmoins, au-delà des structures d’opportunités et des contraintes nationales, l’analyse démontre que l’agentivité des partenaires émerge à la fois de la gestion de la migration en général, de leur statut juridique personnel et leurs ressources biographiques, et de leurs interactions avec des intermédiaires en marge de la bureaucratie de l’immigration. Une telle agentivité – déclenchée par des intentions et des attentes intimes – est contingente et relationnelle.
Mots-clés :
- couples binationaux,
- bureaucratie,
- agentivité,
- papiers,
- pratiques frontalières,
- Belgique,
- Italie
Appendices
Bibliography
- Abrego, Leisy J. 2011. “Legal Consciousness of Undocumented Latinos: Fear and Stigma as Barriers to Claims-Making for First- and 1.5 Generation Immigrants.” Law & Society Review 45: 337–370.
- Agustín, Laura Ma. 2003. “Forget Victimization: Granting Agency to Migrants.” Development 46 (3): 30–36.
- Andersen, Dorte Jagetić, Martin Klatt, and Marie Sandberg, eds. 2012. The Border Multiple. The Practicing of Borders between Public Policy and Everyday Life in a Re-scaling Europe. London: Routledge.
- Anderson, Bridget, and Martin Ruhs. 2010. “Researching Illegality and Labour Migration.” Population, Space and Place 16 (3): 175–79.
- Andrikopoulos, Apostolos. 2021. “Love, Money and Papers in the Affective Circuits of Cross-Border Marriages: Beyond the ‘Sham’/‘Genuine’ Dichotomy.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 47 (2): 343-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2019.1625129.
- Apitzsch, Ursula, Lena Inowlocki, and Maria Kontos. 2008. “The Method of Biographical Policy Evaluation.” In Self-Employment Activities of Women and Minorities, edited by Ursula Apitzsch and Maria Kontos, 12–18. Heidelberg: SpringerLink.
- Bonizzoni, Paola. 2015. “Mariages mixtes, migration féminine et travail domestique : Un regard sur la situation italienne.” Revue de l’Institut de Sociologie 85: 177-190. http://journals.openedition.org/ris/294.
- Bonjour, Saskia, and Laura Block. 2016. “Ethnicizing Citizenship, Questioning Membership. Explaining the Decreasing Family Migration Rights of Citizens in Europe.” Citizenship Studies 20 (6–7): 779–794.
- Bonjour, Saskia, and Sébastien Chauvin, 2018. “Social Class, Migration Policy and Migrant Strategies: An Introduction.” International Migration 56 (4): 5–18.
- Cabot, Heath. 2012. “The Governance of Things: Documenting Limbo in the Greek Asylum Procedure.” POLAR: Political and Legal Anthropological Review 35 (1): 11–29.
- Calavita, Kitty. 2005. Immigrants at the Margins: Law, Race, and Exclusion in Southern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Coutin, Susan Bibler. 2003. Legalizing Moves: Salvadoran Immigrants’ Struggle for U.S. Residency. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
- Crosby, Andrew, and Andrea Rea. 2016. “La fabrique des indésirables. Pratiques de contrôle aux frontières dans un aéroport européen.” Cultures et Conflits 103–104: 63–90.
- Dauvergne, Catherine. 2008. Making People Illegal: What Globalization Means for Migration and Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Deleixhe, Martin, and Youri Lou Vertongen. 2018. “L’effet de frontière dans les mobilisations collectives de migrants en situation administrative précaire.” Raisons politiques 4 (64): 67–84.
- D’Aoust, Anne Marie. 2018. “A Moral Economy of Suspicion: Love and Marriage Migration Management Practices in the United Kingdom.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 36 (1): 40–59.
- D’Aoust, Anne Marie. 2013. “In the Name of Love: Marriage Migration. Governmentality and Technologies of Love.” International Political Sociology 7 (3): 258–274.
- de Hart, Betty. 2017. “The Europeanization of Love. The Marriage of Convenience in European Migration Law.” European Journal of Migration and Law 19 (3): 281–306.
- de Hart, Betty, and Elles Besselsen. 2021. “‘Everything Went According to the Rules’. Female Citizen Sponsors’ Legal Consciousness, Intimate Citizenship and Family Migration Law.” Identities 28 (1): 37-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2020.1723310.
- Eggebø, Helga. 2013a. “A Real Marriage? Applying for Marriage Migration to Norway.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 39: 773–789.
- Eggebø, Helga. 2013b. “‘With a Heavy Heart’: Ethics, Emotions and Rationality in Norwegian Immigration Administration.” Sociology 47 (2): 301–317
- Emirbayer, Mustafa, and Ann Mische. 1998. “What Is Agency?” American Journal of Sociology 103 (4): 962–1023.
- Ewick, Patricia, and Susan Silbey. 1992. “Conformity, Contestation and Resistance: An Account of Legal Consciousness.” New England Law Review 26: 731–749.
- Fassin, Didier. 2011. “Policing Borders, Producing Boundaries. The Governmentality of Immigration in Dark Times.” Annual Review of Anthropology 40: 213–226.
- Fernandez, Nadine. 2013. “Moral Boundaries and National Borders: Cuban Marriage Migration to Denmark.” Identities. Global Studies in Culture and Power 20 (3): 270–287.
- Ferraris, Maurizio. 2013. Documentality. Why It Is Necessary to Leave Traces. New York: Fordham University Press.
- Geoffrion, Karine. 2018. “‘Mariage non authentique’: Femmes canadiennes en couple binational face à la discrimination administrative.” Cahiers du Genre 64 (1): 67-83.
- Geoffrion, Karine. 2017. “Réunification conjugale au Canada : L’expérience des femmes parrains.” Canadian Diversity/Diversité Canadienne 14 (2): 13–17.
- Griffiths, Melanie. 2021. “‘My Passport is Just My Way out of Here’. Mixed-Immigration Status Families, Immigration Enforcement and the Citizenship Implications.” Identities 28 (1): 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2019.1625568.
- Guild, Elspeth, and Jan Niessen. 1996. The Emerging Immigration and Asylum Law of the European Union. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
- Hull, Matthew. 2012. “Documents and Bureaucracy.” Annual Review of Anthropology 41 (1): 251–267.
- Jordan, Bill, Bo Stråth, and Anna Triandafyllidou. 2003. “Comparing Cultures of Discretion.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 29 (2): 373–395.
- Kraler, Albert. 2010. Civic Stratification, Gender and Family Migration Policies in Europe. Vienna: International Centre for Migration Policy Development. http://research.icmpd.org/fileadmin/Research-Website/Test_content/FINAL_Report_Family_Migration_Policies_Online_FINAL.pdf.
- Kubal, Agnieszka. 2013. “Migrants’ Relationship with Law in the Host Country: Exploring the Role of Legal Culture.” Journal of Intercultural Studies 34 (1): 55–72.
- Lavanchy, Anne. 2013. “L’amour à l’état civil. Des régulations institutionnelles de l’intimité à la fabrique de la ressemblance nationale en Suisse.” Migrations Sociétés 25 (150): 61–94.
- Leigh Pigg, Stacy, Susan L. Erikson, and Kathleen Inglis. 2018. “Introduction. Document/ation: Power, Interest, Accountabilities.” Anthropologica 60 (1): 167–177.
- Mainwaring, Ċetta. 2016. “Migrant Agency: Negotiating Borders and Migration Controls.” Migration Studies 4 (3): 289–308.
- Marshall, Anna-Maria, and Scott Barclay. 2003. “In Their Own Words: How Ordinary People Construct the Legal World.” Law & Social Inquiry 28 (3): 617–628.
- Martiniello, Marco, and Rea Andrea. 2014. “The Concept of Migratory Careers: Elements for a New Theoretical Perspective of Contemporary Human Mobility.” Current Sociology 62 (7): 1079–1096.
- Mascia, Carla. 2020. “How Bureaucracies Shape Access to Rights: The Implementation of Family Reunification in Belgium.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2020.1726734.
- Mascia, Carla, and Laura Odasso. 2015. “Le contrôle du mariage binational en Belgique : acteurs et rationalités en jeu.” Revue de l’Institut de Sociologie 85(1-4): 41–68. http://journals.openedition.org/ris/282.
- Maskens, Maïté. 2015. “Bordering Intimacy: The Fight against Marriages of Convenience in Brussels.” Cambridge Journal of Anthropology 33 (2): 42–58.
- Menjívar, Cecilia, and M. Sarah Lakhani. 2016. “Transformative Effects of Immigration Law: Immigrants’ Personal and Social Metamorphoses through Regularization.” American Journal of Sociology 121 (6): 1818–1855.
- Merry, Sally Engle. 1990. Getting Justice and Getting Even: Legal Consciousness among Working-Class Americans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Moret, Joëlle, Apostolos Andrikopoulos, and Janine Dahinden. 2021. “Contesting Categories: Cross-Border Marriages from the Perspectives of the State, Spouses and Researchers.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 47 (2): 325–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2019.1625124.
- Muller Myrdahl, Eileen. 2010. “Legislating Love: Norwegian Family Reunification Law as a Racial Project.” Social & Cultural Geography 11 (2):103–116.
- Odasso, Laura. 2020a. “Des choix intimes dérangeants : Narrations privées et discours publics sur l’immigration et l’islam dans l’Italie contemporaine.” Rives Méditerranéennes 60: 39–59. https://doi.org/10.4000/rives.7313.
- Odasso, Laura. 2020b. “Family Rights-Claiming as Act of Citizenship: An Intersectional Perspective on the Performance of Intimate Citizenship.” Identities. Global Studies in Culture and Power 28 (1): 74–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2020.1723309.
- Odasso, Laura. 2019. “Les implications du dispositif d’immigration : Pratiques de définitions et redéfinitions publiques et privées des intimités binationales en France et en Belgique.” Enfances Familles Générations 34. http://journals.openedition.org/efg/9714.
- Odasso, Laura. 2016. Mixités conjugales. Discrédits, résistances et créativités dans les familles avec un partenaire arabe. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
- Odasso, Laura, and Manuela Salcedo Robledo. 2021 (forthcoming). “Intimacy Brokers: The Fragile Boundaries of Activism for Heterosexual and Same-Sex Binational Couples in France.” In Transnational Marriage and Partner Migration: Constellations of Security, Citizenship and Rights, edited by Anne-Marie D’Aoust, New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
- Ortner, Sherry B. 2001. “Specifying Agency. The Comaroffs and Their Critics.” Interventions 3 (1): 76–84.
- Pellander, Saara. 2015. “‘An Acceptable Marriage’: Marriage Migration and Moral Gatekeeping in Finland.” Journal of Family Issues 36 (11): 1472–1489.
- Peutz, Nathalie, and Nicholas De Genova. 2010, eds. The Deportation Regime. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
- Rea, Andrea. 2017. “The Network-Border: The Articulation of Mobility and Immobilisation.” In Migration in the Western Mediterranean: Spaces, Mobilities and Borders, edited by Laure-Anne Bernes, Hassan Bousetta and Caroline Zickgraf, 32–51. London: Routledge.
- Sarat, Austin. 1990. “Law Is All Over: Power, Resistance and the Legal Consciousness of the Welfare Poor.” Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities 2 (2): 343–379.
- Sarolea, Sylvie. 2012. “Le regroupement familial suite à la reforme de 2011.” In Droit des étrangers, edited by Serge Bodaert, 111–142. Bruxelles: Bruyant.
- Sarolea, Sylvie, and Laura Merla. 2020. “Migrantes ou sédentaires: Des familles ontologiquement différentes?” In Faire et défaire les liens familiaux. Usages et pratiques du droit en contexte migratoire, edited by Aurélie Fillod-Chabaud and Laura Odasso, 23–46. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
- Satzewich, Victor. 2013. “Visa Officers as Gatekeepers of a State’s Borders: The Social Determinants of Discretion in Spousal Sponsorship Cases in Canada.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 40 (9): 1450–1469.
- Scheel, Stephan, and Miriam Gutekunst. 2019. “Studying Marriage Migration to Europe from below: Informal Practices of Government, Border Struggles and Multiple Entanglements.” Gender, Place & Culture. A Journal of Feminist Geography. https://dois.org/10.1080/0966369X.2018.1489375.
- Sigona, Nando. 2012. “‘I have too much baggage’: The Impacts of Legal Status on the Social Worlds of Irregular Migrants.” Social Anthropology 20 (1): 50–65.
- Triandafyllidou, Anna. 2003. “Immigration Policy Implementation in Italy: Organizational Culture, Identity Practices and Labour Market Control.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 29 (2): 257–297.
- Triandafyllidou, Anna. 2017. “Beyond Irregular Migration Governance: Zooming in on Migrants’ Agency.” European Journal of Migration and Law 19 (1): 1–11.
- Tuckett, Anna. 2015. “Strategies of Navigation. Migrants’ Everyday Encounters with Italian Immigration Bureaucracy.” The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology 33 (1): 113–128.
- Tuckett, Anna. 2018. Rules, Paper, Status. Migrants and Precarious Bureaucracy in Contemporary Italy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
- Turner, Bryan S. 2008. “Citizenship, Reproduction and the State: International Marriage and Human Rights.” Citizenship Studies 12 (1): 45–54.
- Zincone, Giovanna. 2006. Familismo legale. Come (non) diventare cittadini italiani. Bari: Laterza.