3.4 Competitive Federalism Today

Contending Issues

Immigration and Federalism

• Historical Context: Traditionally, immigration was a federal responsibility while states managed marriage laws.

• Shift in Responsibilities: Recent decades have seen both federal and state governments involved in immigration policy.

• Immigration Federalism:

  • Definition: The movement of states into immigration policy, asserting their right to enact immigration laws.

  • Since the late 1990s, states have claimed jurisdiction by enforcing national immigration laws and regulating access to education, healthcare, and welfare benefits.

  • In 2005, 25 states had enacted 39 immigration-related laws. By 2014, this increased to 43 states and DC with 288 laws. In 2020 alone, 32 states enacted 206 new measures.

• Arizona's Role:

  • Led the way in immigration federalism with Senate Bill 1070 in 2010, aimed to enforce strict immigration measures.

  • Resulted in federal legal challenges due to conflicts with federal immigration law.

  • Public opinion divided: poll indicated 81% of Latino voters opposed the bill.

• Supreme Court Ruling:

  • In 2012, the Court ruled on Arizona v. United States, emphasizing federal supremacy in immigration law.

  • Struck down key provisions of SB1070 while allowing the "show me your papers" clause but warned against racial profiling.

  • Justice Anthony Kennedy affirmed Congress's broad powers regarding immigration, as outlined in the Constitution.

• California's Divergent Approach:

  • During the COVID-19 pandemic, California provided $75 million through the Immigrant Resilience Fund to support undocumented residents.

Marriage Equality

• Historic Developments:

  • 1996 saw the passing of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), restricting federal recognition of same-sex marriages.

  • DOMA led to states having the discretion to recognize or ban same-sex marriage, resulting in over half of states legislating bans by 1997.

  • In 2006, 27 states had constitutional bans after Massachusetts recognized marriage equality.

• Windsor and Its Impact:

  • The Supreme Court's United States v. Windsor ruling in 2013 declared that the federal government could not define marriage, reaffirming states' rights.

  • This decision invalidated key DOMA provisions and opened the pathway for greater acceptance of same-sex marriage across states.

  • Edith Windsor became a symbol of the marriage equality movement after her lawsuit against DOMA, leading to federal protections for same-sex couples.

• Obergefell v. Hodges:

  • In 2015, this landmark case affirmed marriage equality across all states, further solidifying federal jurisdiction over marriage definitions.

  • Rapid increase in states recognizing same-sex marriage post-Windsor, with 36 states and DC recognizing it by 2015.

Dynamic of Competitive Federalism

• Definition: Competitive federalism emerges when state and federal governments vie for control over specific policy areas, leading to a complex relationship in legality and enforcement.

• Trend of Venue Shopping:

  • Advocacy groups, such as MADD and anti-abortion advocates, often switch their focus between state and federal levels to pursue favorable policy outcomes.

  • Example of MADD's strategy, which led to the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984.

  • Following Roe v. Wade, anti-abortion advocates found more success at the state level, resulting in variations in abortion laws.

Overall, the interplay between states and the federal government on issues like immigration and marriage equality illustrates the ongoing complexities of federalism in the U.S. and highlights the power dynamics that characterize these debates.