This paper focuses on two questions regarding the movement of persons across international borders: do states have a right to unilaterally control their borders, and if so, are migration arrangements simply immune to moral considerations? Against theorists like Joseph Carens and Arash Abizadeh, I answer the first question in the affirmative. However, I answer the second question in the negative.  More specifically, I argue that states have both a positive duty to include highly vulnerable persons whose situation can only be improved through immigration, and a negative duty to exclude prospective immigrants whose departure could be expected to contribute to severe deprivation in their countries of origin. Countries have a right to unilaterally control their borders, but their exercise of this right is morally constrained by these duties of inclusion and exclusion.