Post-nationalism re-considered: a case study of the ‘No One Is Illegal’ movement in Canada Salina Abji* Department of Sociology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Received 29 December 2011; final version received 28 March 2012) Studies of post-nationalism have declined considerably among citizenship scholars in recent decades, and have been largely ignored by social movement scholars in favour of more trans-national approaches. Using a case analysis of a migrant rights movement in Canada as evidence of a ‘post-national ethics in practice’, in this article I argue for a re-consideration of the usefulness of post-nationalism within current scholarship on precarious immigration status. Taking into account both the limitations and opportunities afforded by a post-national ethical framework, I examine how the movement uses a human rights framing in distinct ways to mobilize constituents, garner mainstream media attention, and effect changes to policy at the national and local level. My findings suggest that the use of human rights frames for these movements offers both risks and rewards; however, the benefits may outweigh the risks in cases in which the quality of exposure within mainstream narratives is enough to disrupt, even if momentarily, the pervasiveness of normative nationalism, opening up new spaces for reconfiguring citizenship at the local level. Keywords: post-nationalism; citizenship; social movements; immigration status Introduction In April 2006, Federal Immigration Officers in Toronto, Canada, began arresting children in their classrooms and detaining them as a way to ‘bait’ their undocumented parents out of hiding (Ferenc 2006). The plight of these children and their families was swiftly taken up by local members of ‘No One Is Illegal’ (NOII), a grassroots movement founded in Montreal, Canada, in 2002, with autonomous collectives in Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto. NOII claims that all residents, whether documented or undocumented, have a right to access essential services provided by the state, such as education, a living wage, basic health care, and the right to shelter or sanctuary. The Canadian government’s exclusionary practices of citizenship, they argue, have created a two-tiered system, in which non-status refugees and migrants are treated as ‘second-class residents, barred from accessing social infrastructure, and denied basic rights in all countries ... constantly under the threat of deportation should they demand a living wage and access to essential services’ (NOII 2008). By framing the arrests of school children by Immigration Officers as a human rights issue, NOII was able to mobilize a diverse range of constituents, garner national media attention, and effect changes to institutional policies and procedures. The case caught the attention of the federal government, for example, and resulted in a new state policy preventing Immigration Officers from entering schools, except in cases of q 2013 Taylor & Francis *Email: salina.abji@utoronto.ca Citizenship Studies, 2013 Vol. 17, Nos. 3 – 4, 322–338, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2012.707001