• Authors: Barbara Buckinx and Amelia Frank-Vitale (Princeton University), Nermeen Arastu (City University of New York School of Law), Linda Bosnian (Rutgers University), Shannon Gleason (Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations)
• Title: Distilling Solidarity
• Journal: AJIL Unbound

Following 2018’s migrant caravans, in which thousands of people left their homes in Honduras and Guatemala and proceeded north through Mexico toward the U.S. border, the Mexican authorities arrested a pair of migrants’ rights activists simply for walking alongside and organizing people not authorized to be in the country.

The two were charged with smuggling-related crimes, but in a new paper, Barbara Buckinx, a research scholar with the Lichtenstein Institute on Self-Determination; Amelia Frank-Vitale, an assistant professor of anthropology and international affairs; and others contend that their transgression was nothing more than solidarity.

Their essay explores what this kind of solidarity entails — in particular, its “what,” “where,” “who,” and “why” — with an aim to providing tools to reflect on the complex issues at the intersection of solidarity, migration, and law.

“We explore what it means to act in solidarity with migrants, what compels activists to join in, and to what end,” Buckinx says. “After all, solidarity was not only invoked by those who walked alongside caravaneros in Mexico, but also by the Hungarian government to justify immigration walls and migrant pushbacks.”

According to the authors, the “solidarians” — those claiming solidarity with migrants — work alongside them as equals in opposition to power structures that regulate and penalize unauthorized border crossings. Their motivations range from humanitarian concerns to strategic considerations, with a common goal of fighting laws they see as unduly oppressive and exclusionary. In particular, they challenge commonly accepted political and legal categories, such as “irregular” mobility.

“Solidarity in the migration context is indeed at its most emancipatory when it critiques the designation of certain forms of migration as ‘irregular’ and counter to the law,” the researchers write.

“In that sense, it is inherently political,” Buckinx adds, “which distinguishes it from other expressions of unity, such as friendship or kinship.”

Solidarity is different from other seeminingly similar concepts, the authors contend, because it threatens both power and the status quo.

“Terms like ‘care,’ ‘humanitarianism,’ ‘charity,’ ‘compassion,’ or ‘accompaniment’ are frequently used interchangeably with ‘solidarity,’” they write. “We might care for ill loved ones, donate to well-meaning charities, volunteer at a local soup kitchen. All of these are commendable acts, but not necessarily acts of solidarity. It is because solidarity is threatening, transgressive, and involves risk that it can be distinguished — therein lies its potential to enact social change.

This distinction is important, Buckinx notes, because of the increased targeting of migrants in the United States by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other law enforcement agencies. Immigration activists may seek to disrupt their actions, she says, leading them to be targeted by law enforcement.

“In such a context, it is important for us to assess to what extent the stance of solidarians is distinct from (other) law breaking,” Buckinx says.

The five co-authors plan to follow up on their essay with an edited volume on solidarity, migration, and the law.