Framing Migration and Legitimizing Power: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Suella Braverman’s Illegal Migration Bill

Abstract

Language plays a crucial role in shaping public perceptions, reinforcing ideological dominance, and legitimizing government policies. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how linguistic and rhetorical strategies are used as a means to legitimize government authority and construct migrant identities.  This is achieved through an examination of the rhetorical strategies employed by the former UK Home Secretary, Suella Braverman in her speech on the Illegal Migration Bill. Using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and the Sociolinguistic concepts of ideological positioning and social actor representation, this research investigates word choice, lexical framing, and ideological positioning to reinforce dominant migration narratives. This study employs a mixed methods approach by using AntConc to generate quantitative lexical and collocational patterns, and Leximancer to map conceptual relationships across the dataset. The results of these analyses then inform the subsequent qualitative discourse analysis, which interprets the ideological and sociolinguistic significance of the identified patterns. The findings reveal that Braverman's speech employs binary opposition, securitization rhetoric, and in-group/out-group framing to justify restrictive migration policies. Furthermore, the study highlights the interaction between political rhetoric and media narratives, demonstrating how media coverage can reinforce or contest political messaging. This paper concludes by emphasizing the role of language in shaping public opinion and policy, contributing to broader discussions on migration governance, language ideology, and discursive power. This research provides insights into the mechanisms through which political actors manipulate language to shape migration narratives and legitimize divisive, exclusionary measures.