Immigration is not just a national issue—it’s also a deeply local one. In the United States, the structure of federalism adds layers of complexity to how immigration laws are enforced, debated, and experienced across the country.
But what exactly is federalism, and how does it shape the modern immigration debate?
What Is Federalism?
Federalism is a system of government in which power is divided between a central (federal) government and a regional (state) government. In the U.S., this means both the national government and the 50 individual states have their own roles, responsibilities, and authority—sometimes overlapping and sometimes conflicting.
Who Controls Immigration Policy?
The U.S. Constitution grants the federal government the primary authority over immigration. Agencies like U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are federal bodies responsible for enforcing immigration laws.
However, states and local governments interact with immigrants in their day-to-day governance—through law enforcement, education, housing, and employment laws. This is where tensions arise.
Federalism in Action: Points of Conflict
1. Sanctuary Cities vs. Federal Enforcement
Many cities and states have declared themselves sanctuary jurisdictions, meaning they limit their cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. They may, for example, refuse to hold undocumented immigrants in local jails solely for ICE to pick up.
Supporters argue that this approach builds trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement. Critics say it undermines federal authority and encourages illegal immigration.
2. State Laws on Immigration
Some states, like Arizona, have tried to pass strict immigration laws—such as requiring police to check immigration status during stops. In Arizona v. United States (2012), the Supreme Court ruled that some parts of the state’s law were unconstitutional because they encroached on federal power.
This landmark case reaffirmed that while states can assist with immigration enforcement, they cannot create their own immigration policies.
3. Driver’s Licenses and Public Benefits
Federalism also shows up in policy debates over state-issued driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants, access to in-state college tuition, or state-funded healthcare. While states can offer certain benefits regardless of immigration status, they must still work within the boundaries of federal law.
Why It Matters
The push and pull between federal and state control over immigration creates uncertainty, inconsistency, and legal challenges. It also reflects the deeply divided views in American society on immigration policy—views shaped by geography, politics, economics, and cultural identity.
Some regions welcome immigrants and want to integrate them; others push for stricter enforcement and restrictions. Federalism allows for this diversity but also complicates the creation of a unified, national immigration policy.
Looking Ahead
Immigration will continue to be one of the most contentious issues in American politics. As long as the U.S. maintains a federalist system, the debate over how much power states should have in immigration matters will persist.
Key questions remain:
- Should local governments be required to cooperate with ICE?
- Can states provide undocumented immigrants with public services?
- How can we ensure both national security and local autonomy?
- Federalism doesn’t just shape how immigration policy is made—it shapes how it’s lived, enforced, and challenged at every level of American life.