The impact of liminal legal status on labor market experiences: a comparative study of Sudanese asylum seekers and refugees in Israel

This article examines the labor market experiences of Sudanese forced migrants in Israel under prolonged temporary legal status. It underscores how regulatory and legal frameworks, particularly the mechanism of institutional ambiguity as a form of legal violence, shape migrants’ socioeconomic outcomes. Employing a mixed-methods approach and comparative analysis, the study adopts Menjívar’s, C. (2006. “Liminal legality: Salvadoran and Guatemalan immigrants’ lives in the United States.” American Journal of Sociology 111 (4): 999–1037) concept of ‘liminal legality’ as an analytical lens to compare the experiences of asylum seekers and refugees. The findings reveal significant disparities between these two groups in employment patterns, wages, and exposure to exploitative working conditions, primarily driven by differences in legal status. Asylum seekers are disproportionately relegated to unskilled, precarious jobs at the bottom of the employment ladder, facing heightened vulnerability to exploitative working conditions. Refugees, despite their relatively ‘premium’ status, also encounter significant constraints in labor market participation, reflecting their confinement to the secondary labor market. By highlighting these disparities, this article advances our knowledge of how positions along the continuum of liminal legality shapes employment outcomes among forced migrants. It also contributes to the broader discourse on socio-political and legal barriers that hinder migrant integration.