The following Bachelor thesis aims to analyze recent changes within Swedish migration policy regarding the increased flow of refugees and the moral justifications for these changes, with the help of normative international relations theory. More specifically, it examines: (1) How has the legislative and moral content of the migration policy changed in Sweden since the increased flow of refugees from Syria regarding border management, residence permit and integration? (2) How has the Swedish government morally justified these migration policy changes, if analyzed through a cosmopolitan or communitarian perspective? The thesis examines the Swedish Parliament, which is the body that makes the laws and rules on the necessary conditions for entry to Sweden. This is a single case study with a qualitative approach, which uses normative international relations theory and its branches cosmopolitanism and communitarianism. Through gathering of legal documents, government bills and press conferences from the Swedish Parliament it is found that the majority of laws moved more towards communitarian policies with tougher rules against refugees who come to Sweden. The changes was justified through cosmopolitan language, such as, global cooperation, but with communitarian underpinnings. The government contradicts itself by introducing stricter rules that close the borders and reduce the number of asylum seekers in Sweden, while talking about Sweden's actions resulting in better global collaboration.