This study seeks to describe how restrictions on migration are being justified in Sweden and the United Kingdom, and in what ways those justifications are linked to security issues.

The Copenhagen school's securitization theory, which deals with the processes of treating political issues as urgent threats to legitimize extraordinary measures, is applied as the theoretical framework. Swedish and British governments' approaches are compared by looking at statements in Parliaments, official speeches by government leaders, migration laws, and other official policy documents, as these two states have significant similarities, but they also have policy differences.

Findings suggest that after 2015, Swedish and British states have framed migration as a threat towards their societies and sovereignty as states and a security discourse have been used to justify stricter migration policies.