The French parliament has passed a new immigration law triggering internal divisions and protests within the country.
The legislation, backed by both President Macron’s party and the far-right National Rally, significantly restricts family reunification for international students and tightens access to welfare benefits for migrants.
The law’s journey was rocky, initially rejected by parliament due to opposition from both the left and the National Rally. The government responded by toughening the provisions, making it harder for migrants to bring family members and delaying their access to benefits.
Notably, the law also imposes a controversial measure differentiating between citizens and legal migrant residents regarding welfare eligibility.
The revised version garnered support from right-wing parties, with Marine Le Pen calling it a “victory” and Eric Ciotti of the Republicans hailing it as “firm and courageous.”
However, left-wingers criticized the law as a concession to the far-right, with Socialist leader Olivier Faure accusing Macron of betraying his convictions.
Furthermore, the legislation faces internal resistance within the governing alliance. 27 MPs from Macron’s party voted against the bill, and 32 abstained, highlighting significant dissent. Health Minister Aurélien Rousseau even resigned in protest.
Additionally, several regions, including Paris, have declared their refusal to implement the welfare benefit restrictions.
Beyond France, the new law also raises concerns about the EU’s border migration policy. While a separate agreement creating border detention centers and facilitating faster deportation for rejected asylum seekers was recently achieved, it still awaits formal approval.
The French legislation’s passage showcases the complex and often contentious nature of immigration policy in Europe.
The internal disagreements within the French government, coupled with regional defiance and far-right involvement, illustrate the challenges of navigating this sensitive issue.
Additionally, the law’s potential legal hurdles and its connection to a wider EU framework highlight the multifaceted nature of the broader European migration discussion.
