The author proposes a synthesis of deontological arguments in the ethical debate on immigration policies. The arguments are divided between moral obligations (cosmopolitan, national or private) and universal rights (freedom of movement, right to self-determination, right to property). From this synthesis are drawn the conclusions that restrictive migration policies are difficult to reconcile with the universal liberal principles of equality and non-discrimination ; that the right of peoples to self-determination would be the most compelling basis to justify restrictive policies ; and that, ultimately, it is up to the democratic political process to decide between the ethical arguments in this debate.