Indian Migrants Deported From US Are 'Irregular', Not ‘Illegal’: The Perils of a Label

For the past two days, both offline and online media have been flooding headlines, articles, and social media posts with the word “illegal” while reporting on the deportation of irregular Indian migrants from the US. Unfortunately, even India’s Minister of External Affairs, Dr S Jaishankar, used the term “illegal” seven times in his parliamentary statement on the issue.But is it accurate — or even ethical — to label a human being as “illegal”? Shouldn’t we instead use the neutral, rights-based term “irregular,” as recommended by international human rights bodies?Language is not just a tool of communication; it is a political instrument that shapes public perception and influences policy, often at the expense of the most vulnerable.'Lost Rs 44 Lakh, Tortured': Families of 'Illegal' Indians Deported From USWhen we use inaccurate terminology, we reinforce misleading narratives. This is evident in how the media and policymakers repeatedly use the term “illegal” when reporting on the deportation of Indians by the US government or when discussing “irregular” people in India, as also seen in the context of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).Labelling migrants as “illegal” is a step toward the criminalisation of migration, one that paves the way for the normalisation of handcuffing and detaining those in an irregular status.Unfortunately, even Indian ministers, policymakers and media, fail to recognise that criminalising migration has never been proven to prevent or resolve irregular status. Instead, it fuels systemic human rights violations.Treating migration as a crime reinforces dangerous, xenophobic narratives that portray migrants as criminals — and migration itself as a threat, an approach that serves political interests rather than addressing the root causes of displacement and mobility.The term “illegal migrant” is not just inaccurate. It is a tool of dehumanisation that fuels xenophobic policies and justifies systemic rights violations.In 1975, the UN General Assembly requested UN organs and agencies to use the terms “non-documented” and “irregular” migrant workers, instead of terms like “illegal”. Since that time, other international bodies have made a point of using these terms to avoid the stigma attached to terms such as “illegal migrant".‘Weaponising Migration’: Why Is Belarus Clashing With Poland & the EU?In 2006, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly preferred to use the term “irregular migrant“ to other terms such as “illegal migrant“ or “migrant without papers”. The Assembly said, “irregular migrant” is more neutral and does not carry, for example, the stigmatisation of the term “illegal”. It is also the term increasingly favoured by international organisations working on migration issues.In 2009, the European Parliament called on the European Union (EU) institutions and member states to stop using the term “illegal immigrants,“ which has very negative connotations, and instead to refer to “irregular/undocumented workers/migrants”.The same year, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR) requested that “the use of the term ’illegal immigrants’ should be avoided and replaced by the internationally accepted definitions of ‘irregular’ or ‘undocumented’ migrants, which more accurately describe the situation...”. In 2010, Cecilia Malmström, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, had said that, “And let me be clear about my vocabulary too: illegal migrants do not exist. People may come to the EU and might be required to use irregular ways… but no human being is illegal.” Taking a cue from such advisories, several international media outlets stopped referring to “illegal migrants” in 2013, including the news agency Associated Press. The agency’s stylebook states that it won’t sanction the term “illegal immigrant”, or the use of illegal to describe any person.Save for in direct quotes essential to the story, the stylebook says, illegal should only refer to an action, not a person: “illegal immigration” but not “illegal immigrant”. The New York Times stylebook, too, discourages the term “illegal immigrant”, while cautioning against the potentially euphemistic “undocumented” and “unauthorised”.Yet, governments and policymakers continue to use this term to legitimise exclusion, surveillance, and harsh migration policies. This is not just a matter of semantics; it has real-world consequences. When migration is framed as criminal, societies become more accepting of detention, deportation, and discriminatory policies against migrants.Instead of addressing migration as a humanitarian and socio-economic issue, states choose to criminalise it, weaponising language to manufacture political scapegoats.In brief, we fail to recognise a fundamental truth: migration is not a crime. Criminal law exists to punish individuals who cause harm to others or threaten public safety.Irregular entry or stay should not be treated as a criminal offense because crossing a border without authorisation or remaining in a country without proper documentation is not a crime against persons, property, or national security. Yet, states continue to criminalise irregular migration, paving the way for degrading and inhumane treatment.Chained, Drugged, Rescued: Migrant Workers Forced to Dig Wells in OsmanabadBy framing migrants as “illegal,” we justify their persecution, normalise their handcuffing, chaining, and deportation, and reinforce the dangerous narrative that migration itself is a criminal act. If we acknowledge that migration is a fundamental human reality — not a crime — we will reject the language of criminalisation and instead use “irregular” to describe their status without stripping them of their dignity and rights.Interestingly, Colombian President Gustavo Petro resisted US President Donald Trump's plan to deport Colombian migrants on military aircraft like criminals.In a post on X, Petro assured that Colombian aircrafts would bring back its citizens with dignity — and he delivered on that promise. In another post, he shared a picture of their arrival on a Colombian aircraft, declaring that migrants are not criminals but free human beings. Unfortunately, India not only failed to show the same courage as Colombia but also repeatedly echoed Trump's rhetoric by labelling migrants as "illegal" and accepting this dehumanising narrative without resistance.(Rejimon Kuttappan is an independent journalist, labour migration specialist and author of Undocumented [Penguin 2021]. This is an opinion piece, and the views expressed are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for them.)

BECOME A MEMBER

The Perils of Labelling Migrants ‘Illegal’

Is it accurate, or even ethical, to label a human being as 'illegal'?

Read Latest News and Breaking News at The Quint, browse for more from opinion

Topics: UNHCR Human Rights Migration