In this paper, I discuss some of the criteria that liberal states have used to choose
between potential immigrants. While overtly racist policies have been widely
condemned and abolished, many states have still in the recent past selected
immigrants based on their ethnicity and/or language competency. I argue that even
apparently more benign examples of ethnic and linguistic selection are unacceptable
because they tend to express a morally problematic message that members of
certain ethnic groups within the territory—the people who are really from there—
occupy a privileged position within the political community. And this means, I
argue, that they unjustly exclude members of other ethnic groups. Finally, I address
some special features of linguistic selection that are sometimes thought to make it
justifiable, including the de facto inevitability of promoting some languages more
than others, the fact that languages can be learned voluntarily, and the fragility of
minority languages in territories where there is another language that is more
universally known
