The French Parliament has passed a controversial new immigration law that introduces more stringent conditions for migrants to access social benefits and facilitates the expulsion of irregular migrants.
The legislation, spearheaded by Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin, was adopted by the National Assembly on December 19 after tense political negotiations between the ruling party Renaissance and the right-wing opposition party Les Républicains.
While the government has defended the law as necessary to regulate immigration, it has sparked vehement condemnation from migrant advocacy groups, NGOs, academics, and even members of the presidential coalition.
Critics argued that the law marks a dangerous concession to the anti-immigration rhetoric of the far-right.
A “Necessary Shield”
Shortly after the adoption of the bill, far-right leader Marine Le Pen proclaimed an “ideological victory,” saying that “national preference is now inscribed in law.”
Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne rejected the characterization, insisting in an interview that the law “respects our values.”
President Emmanuel Macron also defended the legislation as “a shield that we needed” to address public concerns about immigration.
However, migrant rights groups have unanimously decried the law as the "most regressive in at least 40 years," leaving migrants in situations of heightened precarity.
Even within Macron’s own party, MP Aurélien Taché resigned from his role as rapporteur on the bill in protest.
Key Provisions
The law introduces a series of restrictive measures that advocates argued will discriminate against migrants:
- Access to housing benefits delayed for five years for unemployed, non-European Union (EU) migrants
- Tighter conditions imposed for family reunification
- Introduction of removal quotas for irregular migrants
- Residence permit eligibility contingent on three years of residence (up from one year)
Migrant rights group GISTI said the law breaches the founding principles of “equality, solidarity and humanity” underpinning French society.
Dozens of NGOs and advocacy groups have pledged to legally challenge provisions they deem unconstitutional.
Threat to Attracting Global Talent
The legislation also requires international students to pay a security deposit of up to €3,070, prompting outrage among university administrations.
The presidents of around 20 major public universities spoke out against measures “contrary to the spirit of the Enlightenment,” arguing they would seriously undermine France’s strategy for attracting global talent.
Caving to Far-Right Rhetoric?
While the government has maintained the law upholds republican values, critics accused officials of capitulating to the anti-immigration rhetoric of the far-right.
Political scientist Jean-Yves Camus said that in accepting policy demands like “national preference,” the law legitimizes the vision of immigration as an inherent threat.
The concessions have also triggered speculation of an ideological realignment, with conservatives looking to undercut the far-right by appropriating elements of their platform — a strategy experts say has repeatedly failed in the past.
Constitutional Council to Review Law
In an effort to defuse political tensions, Macron’s government has sent the legislation for review by the Constitutional Council to determine its legality.
Officials have already suggested aspects of the law are likely unconstitutional and will “evolve” in response to the Council’s ruling.
However, analysts cautioned the strategy risks further emboldening anti-immigration sentiment, particularly if the law is substantially watered down or annulled.
With parliamentary elections looming, the battle over immigration looks set to remain a prominent fault line in France’s volatile political landscape.
“Dangerous, Dehumanizing” Legislation
Migrant advocacy groups and non-governmental organizations have unanimously opposed the immigration legislation, warning of dire humanitarian consequences.
Amnesty International called the law “dangerous” and “disrespectful of the fundamental rights of exiled people.”
The group Solidarité Laïque said the law marked “a historic shift” away from France’s tradition of welcoming those in need.
Advocacy collective La Fasti said the legislation “leaves the field open to completely uninhibited xenophobia” and represented a “serious attack” on migrant rights.
La Cimade, France’s largest NGO supporting migrants, said the law would “make the lives of thousands of people in France hellish” and deprive them of dignity.
Academics have also spoken out against the law’s provisions targeting international students, which they argue undermine France's appeal as a destination for global talent.
Harsher Penalties on Companies with Undocumented Workers
Among its most controversial elements, the legislation significantly strengthens penalties for companies found to employ irregular migrants.
Firms could face a doubling of fines of up to €20,000 per undocumented worker.
Repeat offenders within 5 years face up to 5 years imprisonment.
Supporters argued that the measure would discourage illegal labor exploitation.
However, advocates said it will force migrants further underground while encouraging ethnic discrimination in hiring.
Migrant rights groups also argued that employers rather than employees should be the focus of sanctions.
“It is unconscionable to punish people who migrate simply to build a better life,” said Anaïs Franquesa, manager of aid group Solidarité Mayotte.
Access To Social Housing, Benefits Delayed
The legislation also delays access to social housing and benefits like housing assistance for up to five years for unemployed, non-EU migrants.
Proponents said that the move aims to privilege needy French citizens in accessing welfare programs.
However, rights advocates argued that limiting social protections based on nationality or origin contravenes France’s universalist values.
“This law … turns the social safety net into an instrument of migration policy,” said Pierre Henry, director of NGO France Fraternité. “It establishes discriminatory criteria that run counter to human rights.”
Family Reunification Rules Tightened
The law also tightens conditions around family reunification, requiring sponsors to prove they have stayed in France for 24 months rather than 18.
The minimum age for spousal reunification has also been raised from 18 to 21, which advocates argue may force young couples into precarious situations.
Supporters contended that the rules aim to prevent forced marriages, but critics said that they unjustly restrict the right to family life.
“These discriminatory provisions treat the foreign-born as second-class citizens,” said the International Federation for Human Rights, calling the measures “unworthy of France’s tradition of hospitality.”
Quotas Introduced to Migrants Granted Residence
In a move decried by migrant advocates as “arbitrary,” the adopted law allows the government to introduce annual quotas limiting the number of first-time residence permits issued to migrants.
The cap will not apply to high-skilled workers or asylum seekers.
However, advocates argued that implementing quotas specifically for family reunification applications impedes migrants’ right to a normal family life.
Some within the ruling party have warned the quotas violate constitutional principles of equality.
The policy’s compatibility with the EU and human rights commitments also remains legally uncertain.
“Using quotas to restrict immigration is pointless, posturing politics. It will not lower the number of arrivals but simply increase human suffering,” said William Spindler of the UN Refugee Agency.
Expulsions Facilitated for Migrants Convicted Of Certain Crimes
The legislation expands the criteria for expelling foreign nationals convicted of crimes, including speeding up expulsions for recidivists.
Migrants who “endanger others” can now also be expelled regardless of sentence length.
The law’s backers said that this allows deporting criminals more easily.
However, critics argued that the loose terminology grants officials excessive discretion that could see minor offenses lead to removal.
Advocates have also warned expedited expulsions limit migrants’ ability to appeal decisions, risking improper enforcement of removal orders.
Uncertainty for EU Visitors, Immigrants
The controversial new French immigration law leaves many questions unresolved for EU citizens planning to live, work or study in France.
While EU nationals will be exempt from some of the harsher provisions, the legislation’s broader targeting of foreigners risks complicating daily life for European residents.
The law’s tighter rules around accessing housing as a non-EU migrant could also disadvantage EU students and workers unable to provide proof of sufficient financial means.
Moreover, the zealous focus on expelling convicted foreign nationals may see EU citizens also facing heightened scrutiny and potential expulsion for even minor infractions.
For EU families with non-EU members, the tighter conditions on family reunification pose particular hurdles to gaining legal residency.
The coming months will reveal how aggressively authorities enforce the law’s harsher aspects.
However, the embrace of anti-immigrant rhetoric leaves many EU immigrants feeling less welcome.
France’s Immigration Pivot Risks Widening EU Policy Divide
France’s shift toward more restrictive immigration policies threatens to further divide EU member states struggling to find common ground on shared migration challenges.
The controversial French law comes as the EU finalizes plans to launch the European Travel Information and Authorization System (ETIAS) in 2025, requiring visas for visitors from over 60 countries.
Critics argued that the French legislation underscores the EU’s abandonment of harmonized, rights-based migration governance in favor of discriminatory national agendas.
They said that the restrictive approach contradicts standards agreed under the Schengen agreement concerning free movement and non-discrimination.
With populist parties wielding growing influence, the EU’s foundational commitment to equitable migration policies appears increasingly precarious.
The French law’s velocity toward the anti-immigrant right leaves moderates warning of a dangerous race to the bottom on human rights.
Constitutional Council to Review Law
Facing doubts over the law’s constitutionality, President Macron took the unusual step of referring the legislation for review by France’s Constitutional Council.
Some officials acknowledged that aspects of the law are likely illegal.
Prime Minister Borne suggested it would “evolve” based on the Council's ruling.
However, analysts cautioned that the strategy may backfire by emboldening anti-immigration groups if the law is struck down.
A ruling is expected in early 2024.
In the meantime, the legislation cannot take effect, temporarily muting what remains a fractious political battle over immigration.
Advocates said that regardless of the Council’s decision, the law has already inflicted damage by legitimizing discrimination against new arrivals under the guise of regulating immigration.
Human rights groups plan to mount pressure campaigns and legal challenges to aspects of the legislation they argue contravene core constitutional principles.
The fight over the immigration law’s most divisive elements seems poised to continue.
An Immigration Law that Exposes France’s Ideological Rifts
The adoption of France’s controversial new immigration law has laid bare deep ideological divisions in French society.
For the government, the legislation represents a pragmatic compromise aimed at addressing voter concerns over immigration levels.
Critics condemn the law as an ethically regressive concession to discriminatory far-right policies.
By placing added scrutiny on the Constitutional Council, President Macron may be hoping to defuse the immediate political tensions the fiery immigration debate has unleashed.
However, the strategy risks antagonizing both sides while leaving unresolved core disputes over national identity, diversity, and France’s human rights commitments.
Far from settling the immigration question, the past weeks have underscored France’s continued vulnerability to polarized debates over protecting its social contract in the face of global upheavals.
With an eye on impending elections, politicians may find exploiting rather than reconciling those divisions irresistible, no matter the cost to France’s social fabric.