Should federal law preempt state law on the subject of immigration?
Presentation Type
Abstract
Faculty Advisor
Thomas Loikith
Access Type
Event
Start Date
25-4-2025 12:00 PM
End Date
25-4-2025 1:00 PM
Description
Although the Constitution addresses matters related to immigration, it does not mention immigration itself. The Supreme Court has held that the federal government has the inherent sovereign power to regulate immigration. Nonetheless, the existence of federal immigration power does not automatically preempt state and local regulations affecting non-citizens. Whether federal immigration power preempts all state and local attempts to regulate aspects of immigration has been the continuing subject of litigation. The result has been uncertainty over regulation of immigration. What can and should be done to resolve this uncertainty over the scope of power to regulate immigration? This is a complex problem, a more comprehensive understanding of which requires interdisciplinary research. I used qualitative research methodology (textual analysis) to examine the question through the disciplines of law and history. From September 2025 through March 2025, I analyzed sources including the Constitution, Supreme Court opinions, articles from scholarly journals, and information from non-scholarly sources. I then identified conflicting insights from each discipline, found common ground between them, and integrated them to reach a more comprehensive understanding of the problem. That understanding leads to a suggested resolution of the research problem. I conclude that federal law should be determined to preempt all state and local laws regarding immigration. Immigration is a national issue. A patchwork of federal, state, and local immigration laws creates confusion and uncertainty and results in costly and time-consuming litigation. A determination that federal immigration power preempts all aspects of immigration law would finally resolve this confusion and uncertainty.
Should federal law preempt state law on the subject of immigration?
Although the Constitution addresses matters related to immigration, it does not mention immigration itself. The Supreme Court has held that the federal government has the inherent sovereign power to regulate immigration. Nonetheless, the existence of federal immigration power does not automatically preempt state and local regulations affecting non-citizens. Whether federal immigration power preempts all state and local attempts to regulate aspects of immigration has been the continuing subject of litigation. The result has been uncertainty over regulation of immigration. What can and should be done to resolve this uncertainty over the scope of power to regulate immigration? This is a complex problem, a more comprehensive understanding of which requires interdisciplinary research. I used qualitative research methodology (textual analysis) to examine the question through the disciplines of law and history. From September 2025 through March 2025, I analyzed sources including the Constitution, Supreme Court opinions, articles from scholarly journals, and information from non-scholarly sources. I then identified conflicting insights from each discipline, found common ground between them, and integrated them to reach a more comprehensive understanding of the problem. That understanding leads to a suggested resolution of the research problem. I conclude that federal law should be determined to preempt all state and local laws regarding immigration. Immigration is a national issue. A patchwork of federal, state, and local immigration laws creates confusion and uncertainty and results in costly and time-consuming litigation. A determination that federal immigration power preempts all aspects of immigration law would finally resolve this confusion and uncertainty.
Comments
Poster presentation at the 2025 Student Research Symposium.