Immigrant legalization scholarship assumes that immigrants with “non-tenuous” legal statuses—with ostensible pathways to citizenship—smoothly transition into enduring legality. However, under-studied features of the legal structure and bureaucracy likely disrupt their legalization. Thus, the present article introduces the concept of “gradations of migrant legality” to examine how multilayered, embedded interactions between the state's immigration regime, the structure of legalization opportunities, and the permeability of application procedural standards impact immigrants’ legalization transitions. The study draws on in-depth interviews to compare Venezuelan migrants’ “non-tenuous” legalization process in Argentina and Chile. Whereas Argentina has an inclusionary immigration regime, legalization opportunity structure, and procedural standards, Chile has an exclusionary one. Despite these contrasting trends, both countries have had some inclusionary and exclusionary executive administrative measures. Findings show smooth transitions were possible in both countries when procedural standards were predictable and state bureaucrats eased obstructive requirements. However, disruptive transitions occurred when digitalization changed procedural standards, visa categories required self-sufficiency, and administrative actions imposed cumbersome requirements. Disruptive transitions were more prevalent and harmful to immigrants in Chile because most visa categories (under the law and administrative actions) required formal employment. In contrast, disruptive transitions were less prevalent and harmful to Venezuelan migrants in Argentina because they could access the Mercosur Residency Agreement, which protected their livelihood by not requiring proof of economic solvency. Broadly, the “gradations of migrant legality” framework shows that different organizational levels interact and have compounding, unequal effects on immigrants, including those with visa categories that provide seemingly straightforward pathways to citizenship.

中文翻译：

---

移民合法性的等级：国家法律结构和官僚机构对移民合法化和生计的影响

移民合法化学术假设具有“非脆弱”法律地位的移民（表面上具有获得公民身份的途径）可以顺利过渡到持久的合法性。然而，法律结构和官僚机构的研究不足可能会破坏其合法化。因此，本文引入“移民合法性等级”的概念来考察国家移民制度、合法化机会的结构以及申请程序标准的渗透性之间的多层、嵌入的相互作用如何影响移民的合法化转型。该研究利用深度访谈来比较委内瑞拉移民在阿根廷和智利的“毫不脆弱”的合法化进程。阿根廷拥有包容性的移民制度、合法化机会结构和程序标准，而智利则拥有排他性的移民制度、合法化机会结构和程序标准。尽管存在这些截然不同的趋势，两国都制定了一些包容性和排他性的行政管理措施。调查结果显示，当程序标准可预测且国家官僚放宽阻碍性要求时，两国都有可能实现平稳过渡。然而，当数字化改变程序标准、签证类别要求自给自足、行政行为提出繁琐的要求时，就会发生颠覆性的转变。破坏性过渡更为普遍，对智利的移民有害，因为大多数签证类别（根据法律和行政措施）都需要正式就业。相比之下，破坏性转型对阿根廷的委内瑞拉移民来说并不那么普遍，也不太有害，因为他们可以获得南方共同市场居住协议，该协议不需要提供经济偿付能力证明，从而保护了他们的生计。从广义上讲，“移民合法性分级”框架表明，不同的组织级别相互作用，并对移民产生复合的、不平等的影响，包括那些拥有看似直接获得公民身份途径的签证类别的移民。