Abstract

The 2012 election showed that the Latino vote is a force that must be reckoned with, and this has revived discussions about the DREAM Act and Immigration Reform, particularly about the idea that those immigrants who are already here should be allowed to stay. But why does being physically present in a state’s territory entitle you to rights that you would not otherwise have? This paper examines arguments to grant rights to Dreamers based on membership and territorial presence, and argues that relation to place gives us better grounds for claiming that Dreamers have a right to stay.

Share