Bibliographic record
Abstract
Facing immediate deportation, a lone Guatemalan migrant entered sanctuary in a Montreal church in December 1983. Thus began the practice of sanctuary in Canada. By 2003, thirty-six incidents involving 261 migrants had occurred nationwide. Sanctuary, Sovereignty, Sacrifice closely examines sanctuary practice in Canada. Randy Lippert suggests that, far from being a coherent social movement, sanctuary practice is a localized and isolated phenomenon, and often not primarily religious in orientation. It is also remarkably successful – in every documented incident, state authorities were kept at bay and providers avoided arrest. In most cases, migrants also ultimately received legal status. Drawing on theories of governmentality, Lippert traces the emergence of this practice to a shift in responsibility for refugees and immigrants from the state to churches and communities. Here sanctuary practices and spaces are shaped by a form of pastoral power that targets needs and operates through sacrifice, and by a sovereign power that is exceptional, territorial, and spectacular. Correspondingly, law plays a complex role in sanctuary, appearing variously as a form of oppression, a game, and a source of majestic authority that overshadows the state. A thorough and original account of contemporary sanctuary practice, this book tackles theoretical and methodological questions in governmentality and socio-legal studies concerning methodology, nonliberal power, the role of legal narratives, and the nature of resistance. Sanctuary, Sovereignty, Sacrifice will be of interest to scholars and students in socio-legal studies, criminology, sociology, political science, social history, anthropology, and religious studies, and will appeal to anyone interested in immigration and refugee law and policy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".