Does Digital Status Unlawfully Penalise EU Citizens Accessing the UK's Private Rented Sector?

IF 1.5 4区 社会学 Q1 LAW Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2024-06-25 DOI:10.1111/1468-2230.12905
Jed Meers, Joe Tomlinson, Alice Welsh, Charlotte O'Brien
{"title":"Does Digital Status Unlawfully Penalise EU Citizens Accessing the UK's Private Rented Sector?","authors":"Jed Meers, Joe Tomlinson, Alice Welsh, Charlotte O'Brien","doi":"10.1111/1468-2230.12905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the past few years, more than six million EU citizens living in the UK have transitioned to a new immigration status. The only evidence they have of this new status is in digital form. This group is now navigating the UK's ‘compliant environment,’ designed to deter unauthorised migration, with this new form of status. This has created an unpredictable new dynamic with serious risks of discrimination in everyday interactions, such as when people are trying to rent a property. In this article, we explore the impact of this digital‐only status by drawing on a large‐scale discrete choice experiment with private rented sector landlords, which shows that people with digital‐only immigration status are substantially penalised on the private rental market due to the form of their ID. We argue that this discrimination is not only troubling in substance but also arguably amounts to a breach of non‐discrimination and equal treatment provisions under the Withdrawal Agreement (Article 12 and Article 23 respectively). The apparent lack of effective enforcement points to the potential limits of such protections after Brexit.","PeriodicalId":47530,"journal":{"name":"Modern Law Review","volume":"67 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12905","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the past few years, more than six million EU citizens living in the UK have transitioned to a new immigration status. The only evidence they have of this new status is in digital form. This group is now navigating the UK's ‘compliant environment,’ designed to deter unauthorised migration, with this new form of status. This has created an unpredictable new dynamic with serious risks of discrimination in everyday interactions, such as when people are trying to rent a property. In this article, we explore the impact of this digital‐only status by drawing on a large‐scale discrete choice experiment with private rented sector landlords, which shows that people with digital‐only immigration status are substantially penalised on the private rental market due to the form of their ID. We argue that this discrimination is not only troubling in substance but also arguably amounts to a breach of non‐discrimination and equal treatment provisions under the Withdrawal Agreement (Article 12 and Article 23 respectively). The apparent lack of effective enforcement points to the potential limits of such protections after Brexit.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
数字身份是否非法惩罚了进入英国私人租赁部门的欧盟公民?
在过去几年中,有 600 多万居住在英国的欧盟公民过渡到了新的移民身份。他们对这种新身份的唯一证据就是数字形式。这部分人现在正以这种新的身份在英国的 "合规环境 "中穿梭,该环境旨在阻止未经授权的移民。这就产生了一种不可预测的新动态,在日常交往中(如试图租房时)存在严重的歧视风险。在这篇文章中,我们通过与私人租赁部门的房东进行大规模离散选择实验,探讨了这种纯数字身份的影响,实验结果表明,在私人租赁市场上,纯数字移民身份的人由于其身份形式而受到了极大的歧视。我们认为,这种歧视不仅在实质上令人担忧,而且可以说违反了《退出协议》中的非歧视和平等待遇条款(分别为第 12 条和第 23 条)。明显缺乏有效的执法表明,在英国脱欧后,这些保护措施可能会受到限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
61
期刊最新文献
Using AI to Mitigate the Employee Misclassification Problem StinePiilgaardPorner Nielsen and OleHammerslev (eds), Transformations of European Welfare States and Social Rights: Regulation, Professionals, and Citizens, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2024, x + 226, pb £34.99 and open access Performative Environmental Law Thinking Legally about Remedy in Judicial Review: R (on the application of Imam) v London Borough of Croydon Legal Parenthood, Novel Reproductive Practices, and the Disruption of Reproductive Biosex
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1