Immigration Restriction in the States: Contesting the Boundaries of Federalism?

Abstract

Recent disputes over possible state preemption of federal immigration authority reflect the rise of a coalition that has sought to use state policy to restrict immigration nationwide. The advance of this restrictionist agenda, and the potential for conflicts over federalism, primarily reflect advocates’ ability to wrest control of state Republican parties from interests that favor access to immigrant labor. Direct democracy has played a supportive role by facilitating innovations that could be diffused. Four cases illustrate the restrictionist coalition’s influence on state policy, from domination of the policy agenda in Arizona, to more limited influence in North Carolina, Texas, and Florida. These latter three states suggest substantial barriers to the spread of state immigration policies that challenge federal authority.