Recent from talks
Contribute something
Nothing was collected or created yet.
U.S. state
View on Wikipedia
| State | |
|---|---|
| |
| Category | Federated state |
| Location | United States |
| Number | 50 |
| Populations |
|
| Areas |
|
| Government | |
| Subdivisions |
|
In the United States, a state is a constituent political entity, of which there are 50. Bound together in a political union, each state holds governmental jurisdiction over a separate and defined geographic territory where it shares its sovereignty with the federal government. Due to this shared sovereignty, Americans are citizens both of the federal republic and of the state in which they reside.[3] State citizenship and residency are flexible, and no government approval is required to move between states, except for persons restricted by certain types of court orders, such as paroled convicts and children of divorced spouses who share child custody.
State governments in the U.S. are allocated power by the people of each respective state through their individual state constitutions. All are grounded in republican principles (this being required by the federal constitution), and each provides for a government, consisting of three branches, each with separate and independent powers: executive, legislative, and judicial.[4] States are divided into counties or county-equivalents, which may be assigned some local governmental authority but are not sovereign. County or county-equivalent structure varies widely by state, and states also create other local governments.
States, unlike U.S. territories, possess many powers and rights under the United States Constitution. States and their citizens are represented in the United States Congress, a bicameral legislature consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives. Each state is also entitled to select a number of electors, equal to the total number of representatives and senators from that state, to vote in the Electoral College, the body that directly elects the president of the United States. Each state has the opportunity to ratify constitutional amendments. With the consent of Congress, two or more states may enter into interstate compacts with one another. The police power of each state is also recognized.
Historically, the tasks of local law enforcement, public education, public health, intrastate commerce regulation, and local transportation and infrastructure, in addition to local, state, and federal elections, have generally been considered primarily state responsibilities, although all of these now have significant federal funding and regulation as well. Over time, the Constitution has been amended, and the interpretation and application of its provisions have changed. The general tendency has been toward centralization and incorporation, with the federal government playing a much larger role than it once did. There is a continuing debate over states' rights, which concerns the extent and nature of the states' powers and sovereignty in relation to the federal government and the rights of individuals.
The Constitution grants to Congress the authority to admit new states into the Union. Since the establishment of the United States in 1776 by the Thirteen Colonies, the number of states has expanded from the original 13 to 50. Each new state has been admitted on an equal footing with the existing states.[5] While the Constitution does not explicitly discuss secession from the Union, the United States Supreme Court, in Texas v. White (1869), held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally do so.[6][7]
List
[edit]The 50 states, in alphabetical order, along with each state's flag:
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Background
[edit]The 13 original states came into existence in July 1776 during the American Revolutionary War (1775–1783), as the successors of the Thirteen Colonies, upon agreeing to the Lee Resolution[8] and signing the United States Declaration of Independence.[9] Prior to these events each state had been a British colony;[8] each then joined the first Union of states between 1777 and 1781, upon ratifying the Articles of Confederation, the first U.S. constitution.[10][11] During this period, the newly independent states developed their own individual state constitutions, among the earliest written constitutions in the world.[12]
Although different in detail, these state constitutions shared features that would be important in the American constitutional order: they were republican in form, and separated power among three branches, most had bicameral legislatures, and contained statements, or a bill, of rights.[13] From 1787 to 1790, each of the states ratified a new federal frame of government in the Constitution of the United States.[14] In relation to the states, the U.S. Constitution elaborated concepts of federalism.[15]
Governments
[edit]| This article is part of a series on |
| Political divisions of the United States |
|---|
| First level |
|
|
| Second level |
|
| Third level |
|
|
| Fourth level |
| Other areas |
|
|
|
United States portal |
Under U.S. constitutional law, the 50 individual states and the United States as a whole are each sovereign jurisdictions.[16] The states are not administrative divisions of the country; the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution reserves to the states or to the people all powers of government not delegated to the federal government.
Consequently, each of the 50 states reserves the right to organize its individual government in any way (within the broad parameters set by the U.S. Constitution and the Republican Guarantee enforced by Congress) deemed appropriate by its people, and to exercise all powers of government not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution.[17] A state, unlike the federal government, has un-enumerated police power, that is, the right to generally make all necessary laws for the welfare of its people.[18] As a result, while the governments of the various states share many similar features, they often vary greatly with regard to form and substance. No two state governments are identical.
Constitutions
[edit]The government of each state is structured in accordance with its individual constitution, all of which are written constitutions. Many of these documents are more detailed and more elaborated than their federal counterpart. For example, before its revision in 2022, the Constitution of Alabama, contained 310,296 words, which is more than 40 times as many as the U.S. Constitution.[19] In practice, each state has adopted a three-branch frame of government: executive, legislative, and judicial, even though doing so has never been required.[4][19]
Early in American history, four state governments differentiated themselves from the others in their first constitutions by choosing to self-identify as Commonwealths rather than as states: Virginia, in 1776;[20] Pennsylvania, in 1777; Massachusetts, in 1780; and Kentucky, in 1792. Consequently, while these four are states like the other states, each is formally a commonwealth because the term is contained in its constitution.[21]
The term, commonwealth, which refers to a state in which the supreme power is vested in the people, was first used in Virginia during the Interregnum, the 1649–60 period between the reigns of Charles I and Charles II, during which parliament's Oliver Cromwell as Lord Protector established a republican government known as the Commonwealth of England. Virginia became a royal colony again in 1660, and the word was dropped from the full title. It went unused until reintroduced in 1776.[20]
Executive
[edit]In each state, the chief executive is called the governor, who serves as both head of state and head of government. All governors are chosen by statewide direct election. The governor may approve or veto bills passed by the state legislature, as well as recommend and work for the passage of bills, usually supported by their political party. In 44 states, governors have line item veto power.[22] Most states have a plural executive, meaning that the governor is not the only government official in the state responsible for its executive branch. In these states, executive power is distributed amongst other officials,[23] elected by the people independently of the governor—such as the lieutenant governor, attorney general, comptroller, secretary of state, and others.
Elections of officials in the United States are generally for a fixed term of office. The constitutions of 19 states allow for citizens to remove and replace an elected public official before the end of their term of office through a recall election.[24] Each state follows its own procedures for recall elections, and sets its own restrictions on how often, and how soon after a general election, they may be held. In all states, the legislatures can remove state executive branch officials, including governors, who have committed serious abuses of their power from office. The process of doing so includes impeachment (the bringing of specific charges), and a trial, wherein legislators act as a jury.[24]
Legislative
[edit]The primary responsibilities of state legislatures are to enact state laws and appropriate money for the administration of public policy.[22] In all states, if the governor vetoes a bill, or a portion of one, it can still become law if the legislature overrides the veto (repasses the bill), which in most states requires a two-thirds vote in each chamber.[22]
In 49 of the 50 states the legislature consists of two chambers: a lower house (variously called the House of Representatives, State Assembly, General Assembly or House of Delegates) and a smaller upper house, in all states called the Senate. The exception is the unicameral Nebraska Legislature, meaning it has only a single chamber.[25] Most states have a part-time legislature, traditionally called a citizen legislature. Ten state legislatures are considered full-time. These bodies are more similar to the U.S. Congress than are the others.[26]
Members of each state's legislature are chosen by direct election. In Baker v. Carr (1962) and Reynolds v. Sims (1964), the U.S. Supreme Court held that all states are required to elect their legislatures in such a way as to afford each citizen the same degree of representation (the one person, one vote standard). In practice, most states elect legislators from single-member districts, each of which has approximately the same population. Some states, such as Maryland and Vermont, divide the state into single- and multi-member districts. In this case, multi-member districts must have proportionately larger populations, e.g., a district electing two representatives must have approximately twice the population of a district electing just one. The voting systems used across the nation are: first-past-the-post in single-member districts, and multiple non-transferable vote in multi-member districts.
In 2013, there were 7,383 legislators in the 50 state legislative bodies. They earned from $0 annually (New Mexico) to $90,526 (California). There were various per diem and mileage compensation.[27]
Judicial
[edit]States can also organize their judicial systems differently from the federal judiciary, as long as they protect the federal constitutional right of their citizens to procedural due process. Most have a trial-level court, generally called a district court, superior court or circuit court, a first-level appellate court, generally called a court of appeal (or appeals), and a supreme court. Oklahoma and Texas have separate highest courts for criminal appeals. Uniquely, in New York State, the trial court is called the Supreme Court; appeals go up first to the Supreme Court's Appellate Division, and from there to its highest court, the New York Court of Appeals.
State court systems exercise broad, plenary, and general jurisdiction, in contrast to the federal courts, which are courts of limited jurisdiction. The overwhelming majority of criminal and civil cases in the United States are heard in state courts. Each year, roughly 30 million new cases are filed in state courts and the total number of judges across all state courts is about 30,000—for comparison, 1 million new cases are filed each year in federal courts, which have about 1,700 judges.[28]
Most states base their legal system on English common law (with substantial statutory changes and incorporation of certain civil law innovations), with the notable exception of Louisiana, a former French colony, which draws large parts of its legal system from French civil law.
Only a few states choose to have the judges on the state's courts serve for life terms. In most states, the judges, including the justices of the highest court in the state, are either elected or appointed for terms of a limited number of years and are usually eligible for re-election or reappointment.
Unitarism
[edit]All states are unitary states, not federations or aggregates of local governments. Local governments within them are created by and exist by virtue of state law, and local governments within each state are subject to the central authority of that particular state. State governments commonly delegate some authority to local units and channel policy decisions down to them for implementation.[29] In a few states, local units of government are permitted a degree of home rule over various matters. The prevailing legal theory of state preeminence over local governments, referred to as Dillon's Rule, holds that,
A municipal corporation possesses and can exercise the following powers and no others: First, those granted in express words; second, those necessarily implied or necessarily incident to the powers expressly granted; third, those absolutely essential to the declared objects and purposes of the corporation—not simply convenient but indispensable; fourth, any fair doubt as to the existence of power is resolved by the courts against the corporation—against the existence of the powers.[30]
Each state defines for itself what powers it will allow local governments. Generally, four categories of power may be given to local jurisdictions:
- Structural – power to choose the form of government, charter and enact charter revisions,
- Functional – power to exercise local self-government in a broad or limited manner,
- Fiscal – authority to determine revenue sources, set tax rates, borrow funds and other related financial activities,
- Personnel – authority to set employment rules, remuneration rates, employment conditions and collective bargaining.[31]
Relationships
[edit]Interstate
[edit]Each state admitted to the Union by Congress since 1789 has entered it on an equal footing with the original states in all respects.[32] With the growth of states' rights advocacy during the antebellum period, the Supreme Court asserted, in Lessee of Pollard v. Hagan (1845), that the Constitution mandated admission of new states on the basis of equality.[33] With the consent of Congress, states may enter into interstate compacts, agreements between two or more states. Compacts are frequently used to manage a shared resource, such as transportation infrastructure or water rights.[34]
Under Article IV of the Constitution, which outlines the relationship between the states, each state is required to give full faith and credit to the acts of each other's legislatures and courts, which is generally held to include the recognition of most contracts and criminal judgments, and before 1865, slavery status. Pursuant to the Extradition Clause, a state must extradite people located there who have fled charges of "treason, felony, or other crimes" in another state if the other state so demands.[35]
The full faith and credit expectation does have exceptions, some legal arrangements, such as professional licensure and marriages, may be state-specific, and until recently states have not been found by the courts to be required to honor such arrangements from other states.[36] Such legal acts are nevertheless often recognized state-to-state according to the common practice of comity. States are prohibited from discriminating against citizens of other states with respect to their basic rights, under the Privileges and Immunities Clause.
With the federal government
[edit]Under Article IV, each state is guaranteed a form of government that is grounded in republican principles, such as the consent of the governed.[37] This guarantee has long been at the forefront of the debate about the rights of citizens vis-à-vis the government. States are also guaranteed protection from invasion, and, upon the application of the state legislature (or executive, if the legislature cannot be convened), from domestic violence. This provision was discussed during the 1967 Detroit riot but was not invoked.

The Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2) establishes that the Constitution, federal laws made pursuant to it, and treaties made under its authority, constitute the supreme law of the land.[38] It provides that state courts are bound by the supreme law; in case of conflict between federal and state law, the federal law must be applied. Even state constitutions are subordinate to federal law.[39]
States' rights are understood mainly with reference to the Tenth Amendment. The Constitution delegates some powers to the national government, and it forbids some powers to the states. The Tenth Amendment reserves all other powers to the states, or to the people. Powers of the U.S. Congress are enumerated in Article I, Section 8, for example, the power to declare war. Making treaties is one power forbidden to the states, being listed among other such powers in Article I, Section 10.
Among the Article I enumerated powers of Congress is the power to regulate commerce. Since the early 20th century, the Supreme Court's interpretation of this "Commerce Clause" has, over time, greatly expanded the scope of federal power, at the expense of powers formerly considered purely states' matters. The Cambridge Economic History of the United States says, "On the whole, especially after the mid-1880s, the Court construed the Commerce Clause in favor of increased federal power."[40]
In 1941, the Supreme Court in U.S. v. Darby upheld the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, holding that Congress had the power under the Commerce Clause to regulate employment conditions.[41] In 1942, in Wickard v. Filburn, the Court expanded federal power to regulate the economy by holding that federal authority under the commerce clause extends to activities which may appear to be local in nature but in reality effect the entire national economy and are therefore of national concern.[42]
For example, Congress can regulate railway traffic across state lines, but it may also regulate rail traffic solely within a state, based on the reality that intrastate traffic still affects interstate commerce. Through such decisions, argues law professor David F. Forte, "the Court turned the commerce power into the equivalent of a general regulatory power and undid the Framers' original structure of limited and delegated powers." Subsequently, Congress invoked the Commerce Clause to expand federal criminal legislation, as well as for social reforms such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Only within the past couple of decades, through decisions in cases such as those in U.S. v. Lopez (1995) and U.S. v. Morrison (2000), has the Court tried to limit the Commerce Clause power of Congress.[43]
Another enumerated congressional power is its taxing and spending power.[44] An example of this is the system of federal aid for highways, which include the Interstate Highway System. The system is mandated and largely funded by the federal government and serves the interests of the states. By threatening to withhold federal highway funds, Congress has been able to pressure state legislatures to pass various laws.[45] An example is the nationwide legal drinking age of 21, enacted by each state, brought about by the National Minimum Drinking Age Act. Although some objected that this infringes on states' rights, the Supreme Court upheld the practice as a permissible use of the Constitution's Spending Clause in South Dakota v. Dole 483 U.S. 203 (1987).
As prescribed by Article I of the Constitution, which establishes the U.S. Congress, each state is represented in the Senate (irrespective of population size) by two senators, and each is guaranteed at least one representative in the House. Both senators and representatives are chosen in direct popular elections in the various states. Prior to 1913, senators were elected by state legislatures. There are presently 100 senators, who are elected at-large to staggered terms of six years, with one-third of them being chosen every two years. Representatives are elected at large or from single-member districts to terms of two years, not staggered. The size of the House—presently 435 voting members—is set by federal statute. Seats in the House are distributed among the states in proportion to the most recent constitutionally mandated decennial census.[46] The borders of these districts are established by the states individually through a process called redistricting, and within each state all districts are required to have approximately equal populations.[47]
Citizens in each state plus those in the District of Columbia indirectly elect the president and vice president. When casting ballots in presidential elections they are voting for presidential electors, who then, using procedures provided in the 12th amendment, elect the president and vice president.[48] There were 538 electors for the most recent presidential election in 2024; the allocation of electoral votes was based on the 2010 census.[49] Each state is entitled to a number of electors equal to the total number of representatives and senators from that state; the District of Columbia is entitled to three electors.[50]
While the Constitution does set parameters for the election of federal officials, state law, not federal, regulates most aspects of elections in the U.S., including primaries, the eligibility of voters (beyond the basic constitutional definition), the running of each state's electoral college, as well as the running of state and local elections. All elections—federal, state, and local—are administered by the individual states, and some voting rules and procedures may differ among them.[51]
Article V of the Constitution accords states a key role in the process of amending the U.S. Constitution. Amendments may be proposed either by Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate, or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures.[52] To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either—as determined by Congress—the legislatures of three-quarters of the states or state ratifying conventions in three-quarters of the states.[53] The vote in each state (to either ratify or reject a proposed amendment) carries equal weight, regardless of a state's population or length of time in the Union.
With other countries
[edit]U.S. states are not sovereign in the Westphalian sense in international law which says that each State has sovereignty over its territory and domestic affairs, to the exclusion of all external powers, on the principle of non-interference in another State's domestic affairs, and that each State, no matter how large or small, is equal in international law.[54] The 50 U.S. states do not possess international legal sovereignty, meaning that they are not recognized by other sovereign States such as, for example, France, Germany or the United Kingdom.[54] The federal government is responsible for international relations, but state and local government leaders occasionally travel to other countries and form economic and cultural relationships.
Admission into the Union
[edit]
1776–1790 1791–1796
1803–1819 1820–1837
1845–1859 1861–1876
1889–1896 1907–1912
1959

Article IV also grants to Congress the authority to admit new states into the Union. Since the establishment of the United States in 1776, the number of states has expanded from the original 13 to 50. Each new state has been admitted on an equal footing with the existing states.[33] Article IV also forbids the creation of new states from parts of existing states without the consent of both the affected states and Congress. This caveat was designed to give Eastern states that still had Western land claims (including Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia) to have a veto over whether their western counties could become states,[32] and has served this same function since, whenever a proposal to partition an existing state or states in order that a region within might either join another state or to create a new state has come before Congress.
Most of the states admitted to the Union after the original 13 were formed from an organized territory established and governed by Congress in accord with its plenary power under Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2.[55] The outline for this process was established by the Northwest Ordinance (1787), which predates the ratification of the Constitution. In some cases, an entire territory has become a state; in others some part of a territory has.
When the people of a territory make their desire for statehood known to the federal government, Congress may pass an enabling act authorizing the people of that territory to organize a constitutional convention to write a state constitution as a step toward admission to the Union. Each act details the mechanism by which the territory will be admitted as a state following ratification of their constitution and election of state officers. Although the use of an enabling act is a traditional historic practice, a number of territories have drafted constitutions for submission to Congress absent an enabling act and were subsequently admitted. Upon acceptance of that constitution and meeting any additional congressional stipulations, Congress has always admitted that territory as a state.
In addition to the original 13, six subsequent states were never an organized territory of the federal government, or part of one, before being admitted to the Union. Three were set off from an already existing state, two entered the Union after having been sovereign states, and one was established from unorganized territory:
- California, 1850, from land ceded to the United States by Mexico in 1848 under the terms of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.[56][57][58]
- Kentucky, 1792, from Virginia (District of Kentucky: Fayette, Jefferson, and Lincoln counties)[56][57][59]
- Maine, 1820, from Massachusetts (District of Maine)[56][57][59]
- Texas, 1845, previously the Republic of Texas[56][57][60]
- Vermont, 1791, previously the Vermont Republic (also known as the New Hampshire Grants and claimed by New York)[56][57][61]
- West Virginia, 1863, from Virginia (Trans-Allegheny region counties) during the Civil War[57][59][62]
Congress is under no obligation to admit states, even in those areas whose population expresses a desire for statehood. Such has been the case numerous times during the nation's history. In one instance, Mormon pioneers in Salt Lake City sought to establish the state of Deseret in 1849. It existed for slightly over two years and was never approved by the United States Congress. In another, leaders of the Five Civilized Tribes (Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole) in Indian Territory proposed to establish the state of Sequoyah in 1905, as a means to retain control of their lands.[63]
The proposed constitution ultimately failed in the U.S. Congress. Instead, the Indian Territory and Oklahoma Territory were both incorporated into the new state of Oklahoma in 1907. The first instance occurred while the nation still operated under the Articles of Confederation. The State of Franklin existed for several years, not long after the end of the American Revolution, but was never recognized by the Confederation Congress, which ultimately recognized North Carolina's claim of sovereignty over the area. The territory comprising Franklin later became part of the Southwest Territory, and ultimately of the state of Tennessee.
The entry of several states into the Union was delayed due to distinctive complicating factors. Among them, Michigan Territory, which petitioned Congress for statehood in 1835, was not admitted to the Union until 1837, due to a boundary dispute with the adjoining state of Ohio. The Republic of Texas requested annexation to the United States in 1837, but fears about potential conflict with Mexico delayed the admission of Texas for nine years.[64] Statehood for Kansas Territory was held up for several years (1854–61) due to a series of internal violent conflicts involving anti-slavery and pro-slavery factions. West Virginia's bid for statehood was also delayed over slavery and was settled when it agreed to adopt a gradual abolition plan.[65]
Proposed additions
[edit]Guam
[edit]Guam is an organized, unincorporated territory of the United States in the western Pacific Ocean.[66][67] The future political status of Guam has been a matter of significant discussion, with public opinion polls indicating a strong preference of becoming a U.S. state.[68][69]
Puerto Rico
[edit]Puerto Rico, an unincorporated U.S. territory, refers to itself as the "Commonwealth of Puerto Rico" in the English version of its constitution, and as "Estado Libre Asociado" (literally, Associated Free State) in the Spanish version. As with all U.S. territories, its residents do not have full representation in the United States Congress. Puerto Rico has limited representation in the U.S. House of Representatives in the form of a Resident Commissioner, a delegate with limited voting rights in the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, but no voting rights otherwise.[70]
A non-binding referendum on statehood, independence, or a new option for an associated territory (different from the current status) was held on November 6, 2012. Sixty one percent (61%) of voters chose the statehood option, while one third of the ballots were submitted blank.[71][72]
On December 11, 2012, the Legislative Assembly of Puerto Rico enacted a concurrent resolution requesting the President and the Congress of the United States to respond to the referendum of the people of Puerto Rico, held on November 6, 2012, to end its current form of territorial status and to begin the process to admit Puerto Rico as a state.[73]
Another status referendum was held on June 11, 2017, wherein 97% percent of voters chose statehood. Turnout was low, as only 23% of voters went to the polls, with advocates of both continued territorial status and independence urging voters to boycott it.[74]
On June 27, 2018, the H.R. 6246 Act was introduced on the U.S. House with the purpose of responding to, and comply with, the democratic will of the United States citizens residing in Puerto Rico as expressed in the plebiscites held on November 6, 2012, and June 11, 2017, by setting forth the terms for the admission of the territory of Puerto Rico as a state of the Union.[75] The act has 37 original cosponsors between Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives.[76]
On November 3, 2020, Puerto Rico held another referendum. In the non-binding referendum, Puerto Ricans voted in favor of becoming a state. They also voted for a pro-statehood governor, Pedro Pierluisi.[77]
Washington, D.C.
[edit]The intention of the Founding Fathers was that the United States capital should be at a neutral site, not giving favor to any existing state; as a result, the District of Columbia was created in 1800 to serve as the seat of government. As it is not a state, the district does not have representation in the Senate and has a non-voting delegate in the House; neither does it have a sovereign elected government. Additionally, before ratification of the 23rd Amendment in 1961, district citizens did not get the right to vote in presidential elections.
The strong majority of residents of the District support statehood of some form for that jurisdiction – either statehood for the whole district or for the inhabited part, with the remainder remaining under federal jurisdiction. In November 2016, Washington, D.C. residents voted in a statehood referendum in which 86% of voters supported statehood for Washington, D.C.[78] For statehood to be achieved, it must be approved by Congress.[79]
Secession from the Union
[edit]The Constitution speaks of "union" several times, but does not explicitly discuss the issue of whether a state can secede from the Union. Its predecessor, the Articles of Confederation, stated that the union of the United States "shall be perpetual." The question of whether or not individual states held the unilateral right to secession was a passionately debated feature of the nations' political discourse from early in its history and remained a difficult and divisive topic until the American Civil War. In 1860 and 1861, 11 southern states each declared secession from the United States and joined to form the Confederate States of America (CSA). Following the defeat of Confederate forces by Union armies in 1865, those states were brought back into the Union during the ensuing Reconstruction era. The federal government never recognized the sovereignty of the CSA, nor the validity of the ordinances of secession adopted by the seceding states.[6][80]
Following the war, the United States Supreme Court, in Texas v. White (1869), held that states did not have the right to secede and that any act of secession was legally void. Drawing on the "perpetual" union language of the Articles of Confederation, and its succeeding Preamble to the Constitution, which states that the Constitution intends to "form a more perfect union", and speaks of the people of the United States a single body politic who are the authors of the more perfect union ("We the people"), the Supreme Court found that states did not have a right to secede. The court's reference in the same decision to the possibility of such changes occurring "through revolution, or through consent of the States", essentially means that this decision holds that no state has a right to unilaterally decide to leave the Union.[6][80]
Name origins
[edit]
The 50 states have taken their names from a wide variety of languages. Twenty-four state names originate from Native American languages. Of these, eight are from Algonquian languages, seven are from Siouan languages, three are from Iroquoian languages, one is from Uto-Aztecan languages and five others are from other indigenous languages. Hawaii's name is derived from the Polynesian Hawaiian language.
Of the remaining names, 22 are from European languages. Seven are from Latin (mainly Latinized forms of English names) and the rest are from English, Spanish and French. Eleven states are named after individual people, including seven named for royalty and one named after a President of the United States. The origins of six state names are unknown or disputed. Several of the states that derive their names from names used for Native peoples retain the final letter "s" in the indigenous name.
Geography
[edit]Borders
[edit]The borders of the 13 original states were largely determined by colonial charters. Their western boundaries were subsequently modified as the states ceded their western land claims to the Federal government during the 1780s and 1790s. Many state borders beyond those of the original 13 were set by Congress as it created territories, divided them, and over time, created states within them. Territorial and new state lines often followed various geographic features (such as rivers or mountain range peaks), and were influenced by settlement or transportation patterns. At various times, national borders with territories formerly controlled by other countries (British North America, New France, New Spain including Spanish Florida, and Russian America) became institutionalized as the borders of U.S. states. In the West, relatively arbitrary lines following latitude and longitude often prevail due to the sparseness of settlement west of the Mississippi River.
Once established, most state borders have, with few exceptions, been generally stable. Only two states, Missouri (Platte Purchase) and Nevada grew appreciably after statehood. Several of the original states ceded land, over a several-year period, to the Federal government, which in turn became the Northwest Territory, Southwest Territory, and Mississippi Territory. In 1791, Maryland and Virginia ceded land to create the District of Columbia (Virginia's portion was returned in 1847). In 1850, Texas ceded a large swath of land to the federal government. Additionally, Massachusetts and Virginia (on two occasions), have lost land, in each instance to form a new state.
There have been numerous other minor adjustments to state boundaries over the years due to improved surveys, resolution of ambiguous or disputed boundary definitions, or minor mutually agreed boundary adjustments for administrative convenience or other purposes.[56] Occasionally, either Congress or the U.S. Supreme Court has had to settle state border disputes. One notable example is the case New Jersey v. New York, in which New Jersey won roughly 90% of Ellis Island from New York in 1998.[81]
Once a territory is admitted by Congress as a state of the Union, the state must consent to any changes pertaining to the jurisdiction of that state and Congress.[82] The only potential violation of this occurred when the legislature of Virginia declared the secession of Virginia from the United States at the start of the American Civil War and a newly formed alternative Virginia legislature, recognized by the federal government, consented to have West Virginia secede from Virginia.
Regional grouping
[edit]States may be grouped in regions; there are many variations and possible groupings. Many are defined in law or regulations by the federal government. For example, the United States Census Bureau defines four statistical regions, with nine divisions.[83] The Census Bureau region definition (Northeast, Midwest, South, and West) is "widely used ... for data collection and analysis,"[84] and is the most commonly used classification system.[85][86][87] Other multi-state regions are unofficial, and defined by geography or cultural affinity rather than by state lines.
See also
[edit]- Insular area
- ISO 3166-2:US
- Lists of U.S. state topics
- Local government in the United States
- List of online encyclopedias of U.S. states, encyclopedias typically maintained by state historical societies, universities, or humanities councils
References
[edit]- ^ "Table 2. Resident Population for the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico: 2020 Census" (PDF). United States Census Bureau. April 26, 2021. Retrieved April 26, 2021.
- ^ "State Area Measurements and Internal Point Coordinates". Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau. Archived from the original on March 16, 2018. Retrieved March 14, 2018.
- ^ Erler, Edward. "Essays on Amendment XIV: Citizenship". The Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on July 24, 2017. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- ^ a b "Frequently Asked Questions About the Minnesota Legislature". Minnesota State Legislature. Archived from the original on October 21, 2013. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- ^ "Doctrine of the Equality of States". Justia.com. Retrieved September 12, 2019.
- ^ a b c Pavković, Aleksandar; Radan, Peter (2007). Creating New States: Theory and Practice of Secession. Ashgate Publishing. p. 222. ISBN 978-0-7546-7163-3. Retrieved March 14, 2018.
- ^ "Texas v. White 74 U.S. 700 (1868)". Mountain View, California: Justia. Archived from the original on March 4, 2016. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- ^ a b "Delegate Discussions: The Lee Resolution(s)". The Declaration Resources Project. Course of Human Events. Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences. June 7, 2018. Retrieved September 11, 2019.
- ^ "Declaration of Independence: A Transcription". National Archives. November 1, 2015. Retrieved September 11, 2019.
- ^ Zimmerman, Joseph F. (2012). Interstate Cooperation, Second Edition: Compacts and Administrative Agreements. SUNY Press. pp. 4–7. ISBN 9781438442365.
- ^ Jensen, Merrill (1959). The Articles of Confederation: An Interpretation of the Social-Constitutional History of the American Revolution, 1774–1781. University of Wisconsin Press. pp. xi, 184. ISBN 978-0-299-00204-6.
{{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - ^ Beeman, Richard R. "The Constitutional Convention of 1787: A Revolution in Government". National Constitution Center. Archived from the original on September 11, 2019. Retrieved September 11, 2019.
- ^ "How the First State Constitutions helped build the Federal Constitution" (PDF). Constitutional Rights Foundation. pp. 10–12. Archived (PDF) from the original on August 4, 2016. Retrieved September 21, 2019.
- ^ "Observing Constitution Day". National Archives. August 15, 2016. Retrieved September 11, 2019.
- ^ Barnett, Randy E.; Gerken, Heather (July 6, 2016). "Article I, Section 8: Federalism and the overall scope of federal power". National Constitution Center. Archived from the original on January 31, 2022.
- ^ Radan, 2007, p. 12
- ^ "10th Amendment US Constitution--Reserved Powers" (PDF). GovInfo. Archived (PDF) from the original on December 7, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
- ^ Lehman, Jeffrey; Phelps, Shirelle (2005). West's Encyclopedia of American Law, Volume 8 (2 ed.). Thomson/Gale. ISBN 9780787663674.
- ^ a b "State and Local Government". Washington, D.C.: The White House. Archived from the original on October 30, 2018. Retrieved October 30, 2018.
- ^ a b Salmon, Emily J.; Campbell, Edward D. C. Jr., eds. (1994). The Hornbook of Virginia History (4th ed.). Richmond, Virginia: Virginia Office of Graphic Communications. p. 88. ISBN 978-0-88490-177-8. Archived from the original on March 4, 2016. Retrieved March 10, 2016.
- ^ "Why is Massachusetts a Commonwealth?". Mass.gov. Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 2016. Archived from the original on March 15, 2016. Retrieved March 10, 2016.
- ^ a b c "Separation of Powers--Executive Veto Powers". National Conference of State Legislatures. Archived from the original on February 28, 2018. Retrieved March 12, 2018.
- ^ Regalado, Daniel M. "The Texas Plural Executive". Texas Government (Chapter 4). Lumen Learning. Archived from the original on March 14, 2018. Retrieved March 12, 2018.
- ^ a b "Recall of State Officials". National Conference of State Legislatures. Archived from the original on March 31, 2018. Retrieved March 12, 2018.
- ^ "History of the Nebraska Unicameral: The Birth of a Unicameral". Lincoln, Nebraska: Nebraska Legislature. Archived from the original on March 4, 2018. Retrieved March 12, 2018.
- ^ "Full- and Part-time Legislatures". National Conference of State Legislatures. Archived from the original on March 7, 2018. Retrieved March 12, 2018.
- ^ Wilson, Reid (August 23, 2013). "How much are your legislators paid?". Washington Post. Washington, DC. pp. A2. Archived from the original on August 25, 2013. Retrieved August 26, 2013.
- ^ "Federal vs. State Courts - Key Differences". FindLaw. Archived from the original on May 14, 2018. Retrieved May 14, 2018.
- ^ "Unitary system". Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. Archived from the original on October 9, 2016. Retrieved August 13, 2016.
- ^ Dean, Kenneth d. (1976). "The Dillon Rule -- A limit on Local Government Powers". Missouri Law Review. 41 (4): 548. Archived from the original on October 9, 2016. Retrieved August 13, 2016.
- ^ "Local Government Authority". National League of Cities. Archived from the original on August 4, 2016. Retrieved August 13, 2016.
- ^ a b Forte, David F. "Essays on Article IV: New States Clause". The Heritage Guide to the Constitution. The Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on July 24, 2017. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- ^ a b "Doctrine of the Equality of States". Justia.com. Archived from the original on October 19, 2012. Retrieved January 30, 2012.
- ^ deGolian, Crady. "Interstate Compacts: Background and History". Council on State Governments. Archived from the original on September 27, 2013. Retrieved September 25, 2013.
- ^ Moses, Ray; Dally, Carl E.F. (1966). "Interstate Extradition to Answer Criminal Charges". Texas Law Journal. 9: 166.
- ^ Adam Liptak (March 17, 2004). "Bans on Interracial Unions Offer Perspective on Gay Ones". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 25, 2017. Retrieved February 20, 2017.
- ^ Ernest B. Abbott; Otto J. Hetzel (2010). Homeland Security and Emergency Management: A Legal Guide for State and Local Governments. American Bar Association. p. 52. ISBN 9781604428179.
- ^ Cornell University Law School. "Supremacy Clause". law.cornell.edu. Archived from the original on February 1, 2018. Retrieved February 21, 2018.
- ^ Burnham, William (2006). Introduction to the Law and Legal System of the United States, 4th ed. St. Paul: Thomson West. p. 41.
- ^ Stanley Lewis Engerman (2000). The Cambridge economic history of the United States: the colonial era. Cambridge University Press. p. 464. ISBN 978-0-521-55307-0.
- ^ "United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100 (1941)". justia.com. Mountain View, California: Justia. Retrieved October 30, 2018.
- ^ David Shultz (2005). Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court. Infobase Publishing. p. 522. ISBN 978-0-8160-5086-4.
- ^ Forte, David F. "Essays on Article I: Commerce among the States". Heritage Guide to the Constitution. Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on April 21, 2012. Retrieved October 30, 2018.
- ^ "Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 8". Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School. Archived from the original on October 19, 2015. Retrieved October 17, 2015.
- ^ Robertson, David Brian (2008). Federalism: Political Identity and Tragic Compromise. University of Notre Dame Press. p. 122.
- ^ Kristin D. Burnett. "Congressional Apportionment (2010 Census Briefs C2010BR-08)" (PDF). U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 19, 2011. Retrieved December 11, 2017.
- ^ Levitt, Justin. "Who draws the lines". All About Redistricting. Los Angeles, California: University of Loyola Law School. Archived from the original on June 17, 2018. Retrieved June 17, 2018.
- ^ Fried, Charles. "Essays on Amendment XII: Electoral College". Heritage Guide to the Constitution. Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on April 21, 2012. Retrieved October 30, 2018.
- ^ "The 2016 Presidential Election: Provisions of the Constitution and United States Code" (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Office of the Federal Register, U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. February 2018. p. 6. Archived from the original (PDF) on August 4, 2016. Retrieved October 30, 2018.
- ^ Whitaker, L. Paige; Neale, Thomas H. (November 5, 2004) [January 16, 2001]. "The Electoral College: An Overview and Analysis of Reform Proposals" (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 4, 2021. Retrieved October 30, 2018 – via UNT Libraries Government Documents Department; UNT Digital Library.
- ^ "Elections & Voting". White House. Washington, D.C.: The White House. Retrieved October 30, 2018.
- ^ "The Constitutional Amendment Process". The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. Archived from the original on November 21, 2015. Retrieved November 17, 2015.
- ^ Wines, Michael (August 22, 2016). "Inside the Conservative Push for States to Amend the Constitution". NYT. Archived from the original on August 23, 2016. Retrieved August 24, 2016.
- ^ a b Krasner, Professor Stephen D. (2001). Problematic Sovereignty: Contested Rules and Political Possibilities. Columbia University Press. pp. 6–12. ISBN 9780231121798.
- ^ "Property and Territory: Powers of Congress". Justia.com. Archived from the original on May 25, 2017. Retrieved April 8, 2016.
- ^ a b c d e f Stein, Mark (2008). How the States Got Their Shapes. New York: HarperCollins. pp. xvi, 334. ISBN 9780061431395.
- ^ a b c d e f "Official Name and Status History of the several States and U.S. Territories". TheGreenPapers.com. Archived from the original on August 14, 2009. Retrieved April 8, 2016.
- ^ "California Admission Day September 9, 1850". CA.gov. California Department of Parks and Recreation. Archived from the original on March 28, 2016. Retrieved April 8, 2016.
- ^ a b c Riccards, Michael P. (Summer 1997). "Lincoln and the Political Question: The Creation of the State of West Virginia". Presidential Studies Quarterly. 27 (3).
- ^ Holt, Michael F. (200). The fate of their country: politicians, slavery extension, and the coming of the Civil War. New York: Hill and Wang. p. 15. ISBN 978-0-8090-4439-9.
{{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - ^ "The 14th State". Vermont History Explorer. Vermont Historical Society. Archived from the original on December 21, 2015. Retrieved April 8, 2016.
- ^ "A State of Convenience: The Creation of West Virginia, Chapter Twelve, Reorganized Government of Virginia Approves Separation". Wvculture.org. West Virginia Division of Culture and History. Archived from the original on March 3, 2016. Retrieved April 8, 2016.
- ^ "Museum of the Red River - The Choctaw". Museum of the Red River. 2005. Archived from the original on June 15, 2009. Retrieved August 4, 2009.
- ^ Winders, Richard Bruce (2002). Crisis in the Southwest: the United States, Mexico, and the Struggle over Texas. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 82, 92. ISBN 978-0-8420-2801-1. Retrieved October 30, 2018 – via Google Books.
- ^ Oakes, James Freedom National: The Destruction of Slavery in the United States, 1861–1865, W.W. Norton, 2012, pgs. 296–97
- ^ "U.S. Territories". DOI Office of Insular Affairs. Archived from the original on February 9, 2007. Retrieved February 9, 2007.
- ^ "Definitions of Insular Area Political Organizations". U.S. Department of the Interior. Archived from the original on July 21, 2011. Retrieved November 14, 2007. Office of Insular Affairs. Retrieved October 31, 2008.
- ^ Staff (April 2016). "UOG poll: Guamanians prefer statehood". KUAM-TV. Retrieved December 12, 2023.
- ^ Freymann, Eyck (October 14, 2020). "Counter China by Making Guam a State". Foreign Policy. Retrieved December 12, 2023.
- ^ "Rules of the House of Representatives" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on May 28, 2010. Retrieved July 25, 2010.
- ^ "Puerto Ricans favor statehood for first time". CNN. November 7, 2012. Archived from the original on October 6, 2014. Retrieved October 8, 2014.
- ^ "Puerto Ricans opt for statehood". Fox News. Archived from the original on October 7, 2014. Retrieved October 8, 2014.
- ^ "The Senate and the House of Representative of Puerto Rico Concurrent Resolution" (PDF). puertoricoreport.org. Archived from the original on March 20, 2013. Retrieved December 15, 2012.
- ^ Robles, Frances (June 11, 2017). "23% of Puerto Ricans Vote in Referendum, 97% of Them for Statehood". The New York Times. Archived from the original on June 12, 2017. Retrieved June 14, 2017.
- ^ Congress.Gov (July 7, 2018). "H.R.6246 - Puerto Rico Admission Act of 2018". Archived from the original on July 7, 2018. Retrieved July 7, 2018.
- ^ Congress.Gov (July 7, 2018). "Cosponsors: H.R.6246 — 115th Congress (2017–2018)". Archived from the original on July 7, 2018. Retrieved July 7, 2018.
- ^ Santiago, Abdiel; Kustov, Alexander; Valenzuela, Ali A. "Analysis | Puerto Ricans voted to become the 51st U.S. state — again". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved December 7, 2020.
- ^ "DC Voters Elect Gray to Council, Approve Statehood Measure". nbcwashington.com. November 7, 2016. Archived from the original on November 9, 2016. Retrieved June 14, 2017.
- ^ "How Does a Territory Become a State?". www.puertoricoreport.com. Puerto Rico Report. November 23, 2018. Retrieved November 27, 2019.
- ^ a b "Texas v. White". Cornell Law School, Ithaca, New York: Legal Information Institute. Archived from the original on March 13, 2018. Retrieved March 14, 2018.
- ^ Greenhouse, Linda (May 27, 1998). "The Ellis Island Verdict: The Ruling; High Court Gives New Jersey Most of Ellis Island". The New York Times. Archived from the original on November 15, 2012. Retrieved August 2, 2012.
- ^ Article IV, Section 3, Constitution of the United States
- ^ United States Census Bureau, Geography Division. "Census Regions and Divisions of the United States" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on March 4, 2016. Retrieved January 10, 2013.
- ^ "The National Energy Modeling System: An Overview 2003" (Report #:DOE/EIA-0581, October 2009). United States Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration.
- ^ "The most widely used regional definitions follow those of the U.S. Bureau of the Census." Seymour Sudman and Norman M. Bradburn, Asking Questions: A Practical Guide to Questionnaire Design (1982). Jossey-Bass: p. 205.
- ^ "Perhaps the most widely used regional classification system is one developed by the U.S. Census Bureau." Dale M. Lewison, Retailing, Prentice Hall (1997): p. 384. ISBN 978-0-13-461427-4
- ^ "(M)ost demographic and food consumption data are presented in this four-region format." Pamela Goyan Kittler, Kathryn P. Sucher (2008). Food and Culture (5th ed.), Cengage Learning. p. 475. ISBN 9780495115410.
Further reading
[edit]- Stein, Mark (2008). How the States Got Their Shapes. New York: Smithsonian Books/Collins. ISBN 978-0-06-143138-8.
External links
[edit]- Information about All States from UCB Libraries GovPubs
- State Resource Guides, from the Library of Congress
- Tables with areas, populations, densities and more (in order of population)
- Tables with areas, populations, densities and more (alphabetical)
- "State, Local, and Tribal Governments" on USA.gov
- StateMaster – statistical database for U.S. states
- 50states.com – States and Capitals
U.S. state
View on GrokipediaDefinition and Characteristics
Legal definition and sovereignty
Under the U.S. Constitution, a state is understood as a pre-existing or admitted political entity forming part of the federal Union, with Article IV, Section 3 specifying that "New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."[9] This provision implies states possess defined territorial jurisdictions and governmental structures capable of consenting to alterations, but the Constitution itself does not provide an exhaustive definitional clause, instead assuming states as foundational units derived from colonial predecessors or territorial organization.[10] State sovereignty operates within a system of dual sovereignty, where states retain authority over matters not expressly delegated to the federal government, as affirmed by the Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."[2] This reservation preserves states' capacity to govern internal affairs, such as police powers over health, safety, and local regulation, while prohibiting federal actions that commandeering state officials or impair core sovereign functions.[8] The Supreme Court has invoked the Tenth Amendment to invalidate federal mandates requiring states to enforce regulatory schemes, as in Printz v. United States (1997), where the Court ruled that Congress cannot compel state executive officers to administer federal programs like background checks under the Brady Act.[8] However, state sovereignty is constrained by federal supremacy under Article VI, which declares the Constitution, federal laws, and treaties as "the supreme Law of the Land," binding state judges notwithstanding contrary state laws.[11] States lack international sovereignty, possessing no independent authority to enter treaties, declare war, or conduct foreign affairs, powers exclusively federal.[12] The Supreme Court has reinforced this in rulings emphasizing that while states maintain structural integrity against undue federal encroachment, the Union is perpetual and states cannot unilaterally alter their status, as established in precedents protecting the federal-state balance without endorsing secession or dissolution.[8] This framework reflects a deliberate constitutional design to prevent both state dominance over national interests and federal overreach into reserved domains.List of current states
The United States comprises 50 states as its constituent political units, each admitted to the Union under Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution. These states possess defined geographic territories, populations, and governments with powers not delegated to the federal government.[13] The current states, listed alphabetically with their official two-letter postal abbreviations, are as follows:[14]| State | Abbreviation |
|---|---|
| Alabama | AL |
| Alaska | AK |
| Arizona | AZ |
| Arkansas | AR |
| California | CA |
| Colorado | CO |
| Connecticut | CT |
| Delaware | DE |
| Florida | FL |
| Georgia | GA |
| Hawaii | HI |
| Idaho | ID |
| Illinois | IL |
| Indiana | IN |
| Iowa | IA |
| Kansas | KS |
| Kentucky | KY |
| Louisiana | LA |
| Maine | ME |
| Maryland | MD |
| Massachusetts | MA |
| Michigan | MI |
| Minnesota | MN |
| Mississippi | MS |
| Missouri | MO |
| Montana | MT |
| Nebraska | NE |
| Nevada | NV |
| New Hampshire | NH |
| New Jersey | NJ |
| New Mexico | NM |
| New York | NY |
| North Carolina | NC |
| North Dakota | ND |
| Ohio | OH |
| Oklahoma | OK |
| Oregon | OR |
| Pennsylvania | PA |
| Rhode Island | RI |
| South Carolina | SC |
| South Dakota | SD |
| Tennessee | TN |
| Texas | TX |
| Utah | UT |
| Vermont | VT |
| Virginia | VA |
| Washington | WA |
| West Virginia | WV |
| Wisconsin | WI |
| Wyoming | WY |
Historical Formation
Colonial origins and independence
The thirteen British colonies in North America, which became the original U.S. states, were established between 1607 and 1732 as settlements motivated by economic opportunities, religious dissent, and strategic expansion. The first permanent English colony, Virginia, was founded at Jamestown in 1607 by the Virginia Company under a charter from King James I.[15] Subsequent foundations included Plymouth Colony (Massachusetts) in 1620 by Pilgrims seeking religious freedom; the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1630; Maryland in 1634 as a proprietary colony for English Catholics; Connecticut and Rhode Island in the 1630s by Puritan dissenters; the Carolinas (split into North and South by 1729) in 1663; New York and New Jersey (from Dutch New Netherland) in 1664; Pennsylvania in 1681 as a Quaker haven; Delaware (initially part of Pennsylvania) around 1682; New Hampshire separated from Massachusetts in 1679; and Georgia in 1732 as a buffer against Spanish Florida.[16] These colonies varied in governance—charter, proprietary, or royal— but generally featured elected assemblies alongside appointed governors, fostering self-rule that later fueled resistance to metropolitan control.[17] By the mid-18th century, the colonies had grown into prosperous societies with populations exceeding 2.5 million by 1775, economies based on agriculture (tobacco in the South, shipping and trade in the North), and shared British legal traditions, yet distinct regional identities. Post-1763 British policies, including the Proclamation Line restricting western settlement, the Stamp Act of 1765 imposing direct taxes without colonial representation, and the Townshend Acts of 1767, provoked unified opposition through boycotts, the First Continental Congress in 1774, and armed conflict starting with Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775.[18] These measures aimed to assert parliamentary sovereignty over the colonies as subordinate entities, but colonists invoked natural rights and prior self-governance to claim equality as British subjects, escalating to demands for independence.[19] The Declaration of Independence, adopted by the Second Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, marked the colonies' formal break, proclaiming them "Free and Independent States" capable of entering alliances, waging war, and conducting foreign affairs as sovereign entities absolved of allegiance to Britain.[19] Between 1776 and 1777, most colonies drafted and ratified new constitutions, transitioning to republican governments with elected legislatures and executives, thereby establishing state sovereignty de facto amid the ongoing Revolutionary War (1775–1783).[20] The war's conclusion via the Treaty of Paris, signed September 3, 1783, secured British recognition of U.S. boundaries and the independence of these states, which retained internal sovereignty while confederating under the Articles of Confederation (ratified March 1, 1781) for mutual defense and diplomacy.[21][22] This framework affirmed the states as primary political units, with the national government deriving powers from their delegation, reflecting a causal progression from colonial autonomy to post-independence statehood rooted in revolutionary assertion of self-determination.[23]Ratification of the Constitution and original states
The United States Constitution, drafted during the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia from May to September 1787 and signed by 39 delegates on September 17, 1787, replaced the weaker Articles of Confederation. Article VII specified that ratification by popularly elected conventions in at least nine of the thirteen existing states would suffice to establish the Constitution among those states, bypassing the Articles' requirement for unanimous congressional approval.[24][25] This process involved state conventions where delegates, often divided between Federalists favoring a stronger central government and Anti-Federalists wary of centralized power and seeking explicit protections for individual rights, debated the document's merits.[26] Ratification began swiftly in smaller states with less internal division. Delaware's convention unanimously approved the Constitution on December 7, 1787, becoming the first state. Pennsylvania followed on December 12, 1787, by a vote of 46–23, amid controversy over the convention's rushed call. New Jersey ratified unanimously on December 18, 1787. Georgia approved without opposition on January 2, 1788, reflecting Southern support for federal protections against external threats. Connecticut ratified on January 9, 1788, by 128–40.[27][28] Massachusetts's convention, held from January 9 to February 7, 1788, nearly derailed the process due to strong Anti-Federalist opposition led by figures like Elbridge Gerry; it ratified narrowly 187–168 on February 6, 1788, only after assurances of future amendments. Maryland ratified 63–11 on April 28, 1788, and South Carolina 149–73 on May 23, 1788, the latter marking the eighth state. New Hampshire's approval on June 21, 1788, by 57–47 provided the ninth ratification, making the Constitution operational for the union as of that date, though Virginia and New York had not yet acted.[27][29] Virginia ratified 89–79 on June 25, 1788, followed by New York's slim 30–27 margin on July 26, 1788. North Carolina ratified 194–77 on November 21, 1789, after initially rejecting it in August 1788. Rhode Island, the last holdout, approved 34–32 on May 29, 1790, under economic pressure from federal tariffs and trade isolation.[27][30] These thirteen former British colonies—Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Virginia—constituted the original states of the United States upon full ratification, transitioning from sovereign entities under the loose confederation of the Articles to components of a constitutional federal republic. The process highlighted regional tensions, with smaller states ratifying quickly for security and commerce benefits, while larger ones like Virginia and New York demanded concessions, ultimately leading to the Bill of Rights in 1791.[24][26]| State | Ratification Date | Convention Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Delaware | December 7, 1787 | Unanimous (30–0) |
| Pennsylvania | December 12, 1787 | 46–23 |
| New Jersey | December 18, 1787 | Unanimous |
| Georgia | January 2, 1788 | Unanimous (26–0) |
| Connecticut | January 9, 1788 | 128–40 |
| Massachusetts | February 6, 1788 | 187–168 |
| Maryland | April 28, 1788 | 63–11 |
| South Carolina | May 23, 1788 | 149–73 |
| New Hampshire | June 21, 1788 | 57–47 |
| Virginia | June 25, 1788 | 89–79 |
| New York | July 26, 1788 | 30–27 |
| North Carolina | November 21, 1789 | 194–77 |
| Rhode Island | May 29, 1790 | 34–32 |
Territorial expansion and subsequent admissions
The process of U.S. territorial expansion began with the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which organized the Northwest Territory—lands north of the Ohio River and west of Pennsylvania, ceded by Britain under the 1783 Treaty of Paris—and established a framework for subdividing it into future states with at least 60,000 free inhabitants for admission.[31] This enabled the admission of Ohio on March 1, 1803, from the eastern portion of the territory.[32] The ordinance's provisions for orderly governance and prohibition of slavery north of the Ohio River influenced subsequent territorial policies, balancing federal oversight with paths to statehood.[33] The Louisiana Purchase of 1803 marked the largest single expansion, acquiring approximately 828,000 square miles from France for $15 million, effectively doubling the nation's size and opening the Mississippi Valley to settlement. This transaction, negotiated by President Thomas Jefferson despite constitutional debates over federal authority, facilitated the admission of states including Louisiana on April 30, 1812; Missouri on August 10, 1821; Arkansas on June 15, 1836; and Iowa on December 28, 1846, each carved from portions of the purchase after territorial organization.[34] Further acquisitions included the Adams-Onís Treaty of 1819, under which Spain ceded East and West Florida for $5 million in assumed claims, leading to Florida's admission as a state on March 3, 1845.[31] The 1840s accelerated expansion through annexation and war. Texas, an independent republic since 1836, was annexed on December 29, 1845, prompting the Mexican-American War (1846–1848); the resulting Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo on February 2, 1848, ceded over 500,000 square miles—including present-day California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Wyoming—for $15 million, enabling admissions such as California on September 9, 1850, and New Mexico and Arizona in 1912.[35] The Oregon Treaty of 1846 with Britain resolved the northern boundary at the 49th parallel, contributing to Oregon's admission on February 14, 1859, and Washington's on November 11, 1889.[31] The Gadsden Purchase of 1853 added 29,670 square miles from Mexico for $10 million to facilitate a southern railroad route.[36] Later continental expansions were limited, but non-contiguous territories expanded the union. Alaska was purchased from Russia on March 30, 1867, for $7.2 million, admitted as a state on January 3, 1959.[35] Hawaii was annexed via joint resolution on July 7, 1898, following the 1893 overthrow of its monarchy, and admitted on August 21, 1959.[37] Other states emerged from these and earlier territories, often amid debates over slavery and sectional balance, as seen in the Missouri Compromise (1820) and Compromise of 1850. Subsequent admissions after the original thirteen states followed Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution, requiring congressional approval and typically a republican form of government. The table below lists states admitted from 1791 to 1959, with admission dates:| Order | State | Admission Date |
|---|---|---|
| 14 | Vermont | March 4, 1791 |
| 15 | Kentucky | June 1, 1792 |
| 16 | Tennessee | June 1, 1796 |
| 17 | Ohio | March 1, 1803 |
| 18 | Louisiana | April 30, 1812 |
| 19 | Indiana | December 11, 1816 |
| 20 | Mississippi | December 10, 1817 |
| 21 | Illinois | December 3, 1818 |
| 22 | Alabama | December 14, 1819 |
| 23 | Maine | March 15, 1820 |
| 24 | Missouri | August 10, 1821 |
| 25 | Arkansas | June 15, 1836 |
| 26 | Michigan | January 26, 1837 |
| 27 | Florida | March 3, 1845 |
| 28 | Texas | December 29, 1845 |
| 29 | Iowa | December 28, 1846 |
| 30 | Wisconsin | May 29, 1848 |
| 31 | California | September 9, 1850 |
| 32 | Minnesota | May 11, 1858 |
| 33 | Oregon | February 14, 1859 |
| 34 | Kansas | January 29, 1861 |
| 35 | West Virginia | June 20, 1863 |
| 36 | Nevada | October 31, 1864 |
| 37 | Nebraska | March 1, 1867 |
| 38 | Colorado | August 1, 1876 |
| 39–40 | North Dakota/South Dakota | November 2, 1889 |
| 41 | Montana | November 8, 1889 |
| 42 | Washington | November 11, 1889 |
| 43 | Idaho | July 3, 1890 |
| 44 | Wyoming | July 10, 1890 |
| 45 | Utah | January 4, 1896 |
| 46 | Oklahoma | November 16, 1907 |
| 47 | New Mexico | January 6, 1912 |
| 48 | Arizona | February 14, 1912 |
| 49 | Alaska | January 3, 1959 |
| 50 | Hawaii | August 21, 1959 |
Secession and Sovereignty Challenges
American Civil War and Reconstruction
The American Civil War (1861–1865) represented the most profound challenge to the federal union of states, as eleven Southern states invoked doctrines of state sovereignty to secede and form the Confederate States of America (CSA), primarily to preserve the institution of slavery. South Carolina became the first to secede on December 20, 1860, followed by Mississippi on January 9, 1861; Florida on January 10, 1861; Alabama on January 11, 1861; Georgia on January 19, 1861; Louisiana on January 26, 1861; and Texas on February 1, 1861.[40][41] Virginia joined on April 17, 1861; Arkansas on May 6, 1861; North Carolina on May 20, 1861; and Tennessee on June 8, 1861, bringing the total to eleven.[41] Declarations of secession from these states explicitly cited threats to slavery as the core grievance, with non-slaveholding states accused of encroaching on Southern property rights in slaves through opposition to fugitive slave laws and territorial expansion restrictions.[42] The CSA's provisional congress convened on February 4, 1861, and adopted a constitution on March 11, 1861, that mirrored the U.S. Constitution but explicitly protected slavery, prohibiting any laws denying its right and empowering Congress to regulate only its interstate aspects while banning the international slave trade.[43] Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens affirmed in a March 1861 speech that the new government's "corner-stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition."[44] The secessions tested the principle of voluntary union versus perpetual federal supremacy, with Southern states arguing that the compact theory allowed withdrawal, while President Abraham Lincoln maintained that no state had reserved the right to unilaterally dissolve the union.[45] The war began on April 12, 1861, with Confederate bombardment of Fort Sumter in South Carolina, escalating into a conflict that resulted in approximately 620,000–750,000 deaths and affirmed federal authority through Union military victory in 1865.[41] The Confederacy's defeat nullified state ordinances of secession and dissolved its claims to sovereignty, reimposing U.S. control over the territories and establishing that states could not secede without consent, a precedent rooted in the supremacy of the federal government over irreconcilable assertions of state independence.[46] Reconstruction (1865–1877) addressed the reintegration of former Confederate states into the union, imposing federal oversight to restructure state governments and extend civil rights, thereby curtailing unchecked state authority over freed slaves. Following the 13th Amendment's ratification on December 6, 1865, which abolished slavery nationwide, Congress passed the Reconstruction Act of 1867 over President Andrew Johnson's veto, dividing the South into five military districts under Union generals tasked with registering voters (including Black men) and requiring new state constitutions that ratified the 14th Amendment (1868), granting citizenship and equal protection while prohibiting states from abridging privileges or immunities of citizens.[47][48] The 14th Amendment further limited state power by allowing federal intervention against discriminatory laws and reducing congressional representation for states denying voting rights, directly countering prewar state assertions of sovereignty over domestic institutions like slavery.[47] States were readmitted progressively: Tennessee in 1866 under lenient terms, followed by Arkansas and Louisiana in 1868; North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, and Louisiana (re-readmitted) in 1868–1870; Virginia in 1870; Mississippi in 1870; Texas in 1870; and Georgia fully in 1870 after temporary expulsion for violating terms.[48] The 15th Amendment (1870) barred states from denying voting rights based on race, though enforcement waned after 1877 with the Compromise of 1877, which withdrew federal troops and restored white Democratic control in most Southern states, enabling the erosion of these protections through state-level measures like poll taxes and literacy tests.[47] This era entrenched federal constitutional limits on state autonomy regarding civil rights, shifting the balance in American federalism toward greater national authority while exposing tensions in enforcing uniform standards across diverse state contexts.[49]20th and 21st-century secession movements
In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, secessionist movements advocating for U.S. states to withdraw from the federal union have remained marginal, lacking legal viability under the Supreme Court's 1869 ruling in Texas v. White that declared unilateral secession unconstitutional and void.[50] These efforts, often driven by grievances over federal overreach, economic policies, or cultural identities, have garnered limited public support—typically under 40% in polls—and failed to advance beyond petitions, referenda pushes, or symbolic declarations.[51] Key examples include campaigns in Alaska, Hawaii, Texas, Vermont, and California, reflecting diverse motivations from resource control to historical claims of unlawful annexation. The Alaskan Independence Party (AIP), founded in 1978 by gold miner Joe Vogler, has been the most enduring 20th-century effort, seeking a referendum on state independence to reclaim control over vast natural resources like oil and minerals from federal oversight.[52] Vogler, who famously stated his goal was "to kick the federal government's evil, usurping, power-hungry hand out of Alaska's pockets," led the party until his unsolved murder in 1994.[53] In 1990, Alaskans voted on a non-binding advisory question for a constitutional convention to review the state's political status, with 16% favoring full independence, 36% preferring enhanced autonomy, and the rest opposing change; no convention occurred.[54] The AIP continues as Alaska's largest third party, endorsing candidates and advocating self-determination, though it holds no legislative seats. A 2024 poll found 36% of residents support secession, amid ongoing disputes over federal land management comprising 61% of the state.[51][55] Hawaii's sovereignty movement, intensifying in the late 20th century after the 1993 U.S. congressional apology for the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, seeks restoration of native governance or full independence, arguing the annexation violated international law and lacked native consent.[56] Organizations like the Nation of Hawaii, established in the 1990s, promote cultural revival, land returns, and de-occupation, viewing statehood as perpetuating colonial wardship.[57] Activism includes protests against military bases and the 2000 Rice v. Cayetano Supreme Court decision, which struck down race-based voting in native elections, galvanizing calls for self-rule.[56] Support remains fragmented, with polls showing 20-30% favoring independence, but no statewide referendum has materialized, and federal recognition efforts like the failed Akaka Bill for native entity status highlight tensions between sovereignty and integration.[58] Vermont's Second Vermont Republic (SVR), launched in 1994 by political scientist Frank Bryan and others, invokes the state's brief history as an independent republic from 1777 to 1791 to argue for peaceful secession as a libertarian antidote to federal centralization.[59] The group, blending progressive anti-corporate rhetoric with rural self-reliance, has held mock conventions and fielded candidates, though electoral success is negligible. A 2005 SVR-sponsored poll indicated 8% support for independence, rising modestly in subsequent surveys amid frustrations with federal regulations on agriculture and energy.[54] Critics note alliances with Southern neo-Confederate figures for cross-promotion, despite SVR's left-leaning core opposing militarism and globalization. Local efforts, such as Killington's 2004 vote (by 2,496 to 1,973) to join New Hampshire over tax disputes, failed legislative hurdles.[60] Texas secessionism revived in the 1990s with the Republic of Texas group, which claimed the state was never legally rejoined after the Civil War, culminating in a 1997 armed standoff resolved without casualties.[61] The Texas Nationalist Movement (TNM), formed in 2005, formalized "Texit" advocacy, pushing legislative resolutions for independence referenda; a 2022 TNM poll of 814 voters showed 44% support, though broader surveys indicate 20-30%.[62] Post-2016 election, TNM lobbied for a 2018 non-binding poll, but Governor Greg Abbott rejected it, citing constitutional impossibility. Efforts persist, with 2023 bills for a convention on separation failing amid economic interdependence—Texas receives $40 billion net in federal funds annually.[61] California's "Calexit" gained traction after Donald Trump's 2016 victory, with the Yes California campaign collecting signatures for a 2019 secession advisory vote that collapsed short of 585,000 required.[63] Led by Marcus Ruiz Evans, proponents argue the state's $3 trillion GDP could sustain a sovereign nation, citing mismatches with federal immigration and environmental policies. A refiled initiative for a 2028 ballot question—"Should California leave the United States and become a free and independent country?"—entered circulation in January 2025 but faces steep hurdles, including 600,000 signatures and likely court rejection.[64] Support hovers at 20-25% in polls, concentrated in urban areas, underscoring partisan divides rather than viable exit strategy.[65] These movements, while highlighting federalism strains, have prompted no congressional action and reinforce the union's permanence through economic and military realities.[66]Governmental Structure
State constitutions
Each of the 50 U.S. states maintains its own constitution, which establishes the framework for state government, including the separation of powers among legislative, executive, and judicial branches, and enumerates individual rights, while remaining subordinate to the U.S. Constitution under the Supremacy Clause of Article VI. Unlike the federal document, state constitutions typically address a broader array of policy matters, such as education, local government organization, and taxation, reflecting their role in managing intrastate affairs delegated by federalism.[67] They originated primarily during the American Revolutionary era, with early examples drafted between 1776 and 1780 by colonial conventions asserting sovereignty from British rule, though subsequent versions emerged with territorial expansions and reconstructions.[68] The Massachusetts Constitution, ratified on October 25, 1780, stands as the oldest state constitution still in continuous effect and the world's oldest functioning written constitution.[69] Drafted largely by John Adams, it influenced the U.S. Constitution through its emphasis on separation of powers and a bicameral legislature, and has undergone 130 amendments as of 2023, often expanding rights like those related to education and environmental protections.[70] In contrast, Alabama's 1901 constitution, the longest at over 40,000 words originally, has accrued more than 900 amendments, many addressing fiscal constraints imposed post-Reconstruction to limit state spending and intervention.[71] Vermont's 1793 constitution remains the shortest, at approximately 8,300 words, prioritizing brevity in outlining government functions.[72] State constitutions differ markedly from the federal one in length, amendability, and detail: the average state document exceeds 20,000 words and has been amended hundreds of times collectively across states—far surpassing the U.S. Constitution's 27 amendments—due to processes like legislative proposals requiring voter ratification or, in 18 states, citizen initiatives.[68][73] This flexibility allows responsiveness to local needs but can lead to patchwork revisions; for instance, California's constitution, amended over 500 times since 1879, includes provisions on water rights and initiative processes not found in federal law.[71] Courts interpret these documents independently, sometimes affording greater protections—such as expanded privacy rights—than federal minima, as state supreme courts hold final authority on state law absent federal preemption.[74] No state constitution has been entirely rewritten since 1982, though periodic conventions or commissions propose consolidations to reduce bloat from accreted amendments.[75]Executive branch
The executive branch of each U.S. state is responsible for implementing and enforcing state laws, managing state agencies, and overseeing administrative operations, with the governor serving as its chief executive.[76] Governors are directly elected by popular vote in all states, typically for four-year terms in 48 states (including the District of Columbia for comparative purposes), and two-year terms in New Hampshire and Vermont.[77] Their powers, derived from state constitutions, generally include proposing budgets, vetoing legislation (with item veto authority in 43 states allowing rejection of specific provisions), commanding the state National Guard, granting pardons, and appointing officials to fill vacancies or head agencies, though the scope varies by state—such as stronger appointment powers in states like New York compared to more fragmented authority in plural executive systems.[76][78] Thirty-six states impose term limits on governors, most commonly restricting service to two consecutive four-year terms with eligibility to run again after one term out of office, while 14 states impose no such limits, allowing indefinite reelection.[79] The lieutenant governor serves as second-in-command in 45 states, often assuming gubernatorial duties in cases of vacancy, death, or incapacity; this office is elected separately in 16 states but on a joint ticket with the governor in 26 states to align party affiliation, while in Maine and New Hampshire, the state senate president fills the role, and Arizona lacks a distinct lieutenant governor position.[80][76] In states with lieutenant governors, the officeholder may also preside over the state senate, casting tie-breaking votes, though duties differ—ranging from ceremonial in some to substantive policy roles in others like budget oversight in Texas.[81] Most states operate under a plural executive model, where key positions beyond the governor—such as attorney general (elected in 43 states), secretary of state (35 states), state treasurer (36 states), and auditor or comptroller (in varying forms)—are filled by separate popular elections rather than gubernatorial appointment, reducing centralized control compared to the federal executive and fostering checks among independently accountable officials.[82] This structure, rooted in post-colonial distrust of concentrated power, contrasts with unitary executives in a minority of states like Kansas, where the governor appoints cabinet heads with legislative confirmation.[76] State executives coordinate with federal counterparts on shared issues like emergency response but retain autonomy in areas such as education policy and law enforcement, subject to constitutional limits on federal preemption.[76]Legislative branch
Forty-nine U.S. states operate bicameral legislatures consisting of an upper chamber, typically called the senate, and a lower chamber, often designated as the house of representatives, house of delegates, or assembly, with the combined body usually termed the state legislature or general assembly.[83] Nebraska is the sole exception, employing a unicameral legislature known as the Nebraska Legislature, established in 1937 to streamline decision-making and reduce costs associated with dual chambers.[84] Across all states, there are 7,386 legislative seats distributed among 99 chambers (98 in bicameral systems plus Nebraska's single body), with chamber sizes varying widely—California's assembly holds 80 members while Alaska's house has 40, and senates range from 20 in Alaska to 67 in Minnesota.[85] State legislators are elected by popular vote from single-member districts apportioned by population decennially following the federal census, ensuring representation aligns with demographic shifts, though gerrymandering controversies persist in several states.[86] Term lengths differ: lower chambers typically serve two-year terms in 46 states, with four-year terms in Delaware, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Dakota; upper chambers generally have four-year terms, often staggered to maintain continuity, except for New Hampshire and Vermont where senators also serve two years.[87] Fifteen states impose term limits on legislators—typically six to eight years for lower houses and eight to twelve for senates—enacted via voter initiatives or legislation since the 1990s to curb careerism, though compliance and effects on legislative expertise remain debated.[88] The primary functions of state legislatures include enacting statutes on intrastate matters such as education, criminal justice, transportation, and public health—areas reserved under the U.S. Constitution's Tenth Amendment—while appropriating funds for state operations, approving budgets proposed by the governor, and originating revenue bills including taxes.[83] [89] Legislatures also wield oversight powers, such as confirming gubernatorial appointments in many states, conducting investigations, and impeaching executive or judicial officials, with the lower chamber typically initiating impeachment and the upper chamber conducting trials.[83] Bills require passage by both chambers (or unicameral approval in Nebraska) and gubernatorial signature, subject to veto override by supermajority vote, mirroring federal processes but adapted to state constitutions.[83] Legislative sessions occur annually in 46 states, convening for durations from 30 days in Montana to year-round in California, while Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, and Texas hold biennial sessions limited by constitution to fiscal biennia.[90] [91] Professionalism varies: NCSL classifies legislatures into full-time (e.g., New York, with salaried lawmakers and extensive staff), part-time (e.g., hybrid models in Ohio), and citizen types (e.g., New Hampshire, where members receive minimal pay and meet briefly), influencing policy depth and responsiveness.[86] Committee systems dominate bill review, with leadership roles like speaker of the house and senate president shaping agendas, often along partisan lines given that Republicans controlled 57 chambers and Democrats 41 as of 2023, with one tied.[85]Judicial branch
Each U.S. state operates an independent judicial branch responsible for interpreting and applying its constitution, statutes, and common law in resolving disputes. State courts exercise original jurisdiction over most civil and criminal matters arising under state law, including family law, probate, contracts, torts, and felonies, while also serving as courts of last resort for state constitutional issues unless appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on federal grounds. This system handles the overwhelming majority of litigation in the United States, with state courts adjudicating approximately 66 million cases per year as of recent data, dwarfing the federal judiciary's caseload of around 353,000 filings annually.[92][93][12] State judicial structures generally follow a three-tier hierarchy: trial courts of limited jurisdiction (such as municipal or justice courts handling minor offenses and small claims), trial courts of general jurisdiction (often called superior, district, or circuit courts for major civil and criminal cases), and appellate courts culminating in the state's highest court. Larger states typically include intermediate appellate courts to review trial decisions before reaching the supreme court, while smaller states may route appeals directly to the highest level. The highest court, usually named the Supreme Court but occasionally the Court of Appeals (as in New York or Maryland), possesses discretionary review authority over most appeals and mandatory jurisdiction in key areas like death penalty cases or conflicts between lower courts. Justices on these courts number between five and nine, with terms varying from six years to life in rare cases, though most states impose fixed terms followed by retention elections or reappointment processes.[94][12] Selection of state judges diverges significantly across states and court levels, reflecting debates over judicial independence versus accountability. Common methods include partisan elections (where candidates affiliate with political parties, used for some judges in 14 states), nonpartisan elections (21 states, emphasizing qualifications over party), gubernatorial appointment with legislative confirmation or retention votes (13 states), legislative appointment, and merit selection systems (such as the Missouri Plan, involving nominating commissions and retention elections in 10 states for appellate judges). Trial court judges are more often elected, while appellate judges lean toward appointment or merit processes to insulate from electoral pressures. These variations stem from state constitutions and traditions, with elections predominant in the South and appointments more common in the Northeast.[95][96] State judiciaries maintain administrative independence, often led by the chief justice who oversees court operations, budgets, and rulemaking under state supreme court authority. However, funding reliance on legislatures can introduce tensions, and some states employ judicial conduct commissions for discipline. While state courts may adjudicate federal questions under concurrent jurisdiction, federal courts generally preempt in areas like constitutional rights or interstate commerce, ensuring dual sovereignty without routine overlap.[94][12]Federalism and Intergovernmental Dynamics
Constitutional principles of federalism
The U.S. Constitution establishes federalism as a system dividing sovereignty between the national government and the states, granting the former limited, enumerated powers while preserving substantial authority for the latter. Article I, Section 8 specifies eighteen enumerated powers for Congress, including the authority to lay and collect taxes, regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the states, coin money, establish post offices, and declare war, all intended to address collective needs without encroaching on state autonomy.[97] These powers reflect the framers' intent to create a stronger central authority than under the Articles of Confederation, which had proven inadequate for national coordination, yet still constrain federal reach to explicit grants.[98] Complementing these delegations, the Tenth Amendment, ratified in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights, codifies the principle of reserved powers: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."[99] This provision affirms that states retain sovereignty over local governance, such as education, law enforcement, and intrastate regulation, unless explicitly surrendered, ensuring federalism's dual structure where neither level dominates inherently.[100] The amendment arose from Anti-Federalist concerns during ratification debates, emphasizing that unenumerated powers default to states or individuals to prevent centralized overreach.[101] Article VI, Clause 2, known as the Supremacy Clause, declares the Constitution, federal laws made pursuant thereto, and treaties as "the supreme Law of the Land," binding state judges and overriding conflicting state measures.[11] This clause upholds federal preeminence in delegated areas—such as interstate commerce regulation—but does not expand federal authority beyond constitutional limits, maintaining federalism's balance by requiring federal actions to align with enumerated powers.[98] In practice, it resolves conflicts by prioritizing valid federal enactments, as seen in early judicial interpretations affirming state immunity from federal commandeering in non-delegated spheres.[5] These principles collectively embody a compact among states, forming a union where federal authority derives from state consent via ratification, yet states operate as co-sovereigns with independent electoral processes and constitutional frameworks.[5] Federalism thus promotes experimentation in state policies—such as varying tax structures or criminal codes—while enabling national uniformity in defense and trade, a design rooted in the Constitution's Preamble commitment to a "more perfect Union" without dissolving state identities.[102]Historical tensions and nullification doctrines
The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 represented early assertions of state authority to counter perceived federal overreach. Drafted anonymously by Thomas Jefferson for Kentucky and James Madison for Virginia, these resolutions protested the Alien and Sedition Acts, which expanded federal power over immigration and criminalized criticism of the government.[103][104] They advanced the compact theory of the Constitution, positing that states, as parties to the union, retained the right to "interpose" against unconstitutional federal laws to protect citizens' liberties.[105] This doctrine emphasized the limited, delegated nature of federal authority, rooted in the voluntary association of sovereign states rather than unlimited national supremacy. These ideas evolved into the more explicit nullification doctrine, formalized by John C. Calhoun in his 1828 South Carolina Exposition and Protest. Responding to the Tariff of 1828—derisively called the "Tariff of Abominations" for its protective rates favoring Northern manufacturing at the expense of Southern agricultural exporters—Calhoun argued that a state convention could declare a federal law unconstitutional, rendering it void within state borders until repealed or overridden by a constitutional amendment.[106][107] The doctrine framed the Constitution as a compact among states, with each retaining sovereignty to judge federal actions' constitutionality, reflecting causal tensions from economic disparities: Southern states viewed tariffs as redistributive plunder benefiting industrial North over export-dependent South.[108] The Nullification Crisis peaked in 1832–1833 when South Carolina enacted Calhoun's theory. On November 24, 1832, a state convention adopted the Ordinance of Nullification, declaring the Tariffs of 1828 and 1832 "null, void, and no law" within the state, effective February 1, 1833, and threatening secession if federal enforcement proceeded.[109][110] President Andrew Jackson countered with a December 10, 1832, proclamation affirming federal supremacy under Article VI, rejecting nullification as incompatible with union and warning of military enforcement.[107] Congress passed the Force Bill on March 2, 1833, authorizing Jackson to use army and navy to collect duties, while Henry Clay's Compromise Tariff gradually reduced rates over a decade, prompting South Carolina to rescind its ordinance on March 15, 1833—though it symbolically nullified the Force Bill to preserve face.[106] These events underscored persistent federal-state frictions, with nullification embodying resistance to centralized power amid sectional economic interests, though it failed practically and was later repudiated in favor of judicial review via the Supreme Court. Other 19th-century instances, such as Wisconsin's 1850 declaration against the Fugitive Slave Act, echoed interposition but similarly yielded to federal authority, highlighting the doctrine's limits under the Supremacy Clause.[106] The crisis intensified debates over sovereignty, presaging Civil War divisions without resolving underlying causal drivers like tariff-induced wealth transfers.[108]Modern conflicts over sovereignty
In the 21st century, U.S. states have increasingly invoked principles of federalism to challenge federal authority, often through lawsuits, non-cooperation policies, and assertions of concurrent powers, particularly in areas like immigration, environmental regulation, and public health mandates. These conflicts reflect ongoing debates over the scope of federal supremacy under the Supremacy Clause versus states' reserved powers under the Tenth Amendment, with states arguing that federal overreach encroaches on their sovereignty. For instance, between 2020 and 2025, over 25 multistate lawsuits targeted federal executive actions, highlighting a pattern of resistance to perceived unfunded mandates and regulatory expansion.[111][112] A prominent example involves immigration enforcement, where states have diverged sharply from federal policy. Texas launched Operation Lone Star in 2021, deploying state resources including National Guard troops and installing razor wire along the Rio Grande to deter illegal crossings, directly conflicting with federal Border Patrol operations. In January 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that federal agents could remove Texas-installed barriers in Eagle Pass, affirming federal primacy over border removal but not halting state installations, as Texas continued fortifications amid over 500,000 apprehensions in fiscal year 2024. Texas Senate Bill 4, enacted in 2024, empowered state officers to arrest and deport suspected illegal entrants, prompting federal injunctions on preemption grounds, though the law underscored states' claims to protect public safety absent federal action. Conversely, sanctuary jurisdictions in states like California and New York have limited local cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) since the 2010s, refusing to honor detainers without warrants; by 2025, the Department of Justice identified over 300 such policies restricting federal access to jails, invoking the anti-commandeering doctrine from Printz v. United States (1997), which prohibits federal coercion of state officials.[113][114][115][116][117] Environmental policy has similarly fueled sovereignty disputes, with energy-producing states contesting EPA regulations as exceeding statutory authority under the Clean Air Act. In May 2024, attorneys general from 25 states, led by West Virginia, petitioned the D.C. Circuit to overturn the EPA's power plant emissions rule, which aimed to shift generation from coal and gas to renewables by 2035-2040, arguing it imposed unachievable standards and bypassed congressional intent. Similar challenges arose against 2023 methane emission limits for oil and gas operations, with 24 Republican-led states seeking Supreme Court intervention in 2024 to pause enforcement, citing economic harm to local industries estimated at billions in compliance costs. These suits echo prior invalidations, such as the 2015 Clean Power Plan's partial overturn in West Virginia v. EPA (2022), where the Court curtailed agency deference under the major questions doctrine.[118][119] Public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic from 2020-2022 exemplified ad hoc assertions of state autonomy, with governors in states like Florida and Texas issuing executive orders to reopen economies and prohibit local mask or vaccine mandates conflicting with federal Centers for Disease Control guidelines, leading to over 100 lawsuits testing emergency powers. While federal funding conditions under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 spurred some compliance, states successfully resisted vaccine mandates for federal contractors in cases like NFIB v. OSHA (2022), where the Supreme Court blocked broad employer requirements affecting 84 million workers. These episodes, alongside ongoing litigation over voting laws and abortion post-Dobbs v. Jackson (2022), illustrate states' use of courts to recalibrate federalism, often prevailing when federal actions lack clear statutory backing.[111][120]Relations with Other Entities
Interstate compacts and disputes
Interstate compacts are binding agreements between U.S. states that address shared interests such as resource management, transportation, and criminal justice, requiring congressional consent under the Compact Clause (Article I, Section 10, Clause 3) to ensure they do not encroach on federal authority or alter the balance of power among states.[121][122] Historically, these compacts originated from colonial-era boundary resolutions and proliferated in the 20th century for regional governance; as of 2023, over 200 active compacts exist, covering topics from water allocation to professional licensing.[122][123] The Supreme Court has clarified that not all interstate agreements qualify as compacts necessitating consent—only those infringing on congressional prerogatives or resembling treaties— as in Virginia v. Tennessee (1896), where a boundary adjustment was upheld without prior approval.[124] Key examples include the Colorado River Compact of 1922, ratified by Congress in 1928, which divides annual flows of 15 million acre-feet among Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming to mitigate drought-induced conflicts, supplemented by the Boulder Canyon Project Act of 1928 for downstream allocations.[125] The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Compact of 1921 established a bistate agency managing bridges, tunnels, and airports across 1,500 square miles, handling over 350 million vehicle crossings annually as of recent data.[122] Other significant compacts encompass the Interstate Driver License Compact (joined by 45 states by 2023 for reciprocal licensing) and the Multistate Tax Compact (1967), which standardized apportionment formulas to curb double taxation until partial invalidation by the Court in United States Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Comm'n (1978).[126][127] Interstate disputes, often involving water rights, boundaries, or compact enforcement, fall under the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction per Article III, Section 2, with the Court adjudicating over 150 such cases since 1789, though fewer than 10% reach full merits review.[128] In Arizona v. California (1963), the Court upheld federal allocations under the 1922 Compact and 1928 Act, awarding California 4.4 million acre-feet annually while resolving claims by Arizona and others over tributaries.[129] Boundary conflicts, such as Illinois v. Kentucky (1991), determined the Mississippi River's thalweg (deepest channel) as the line circa 1830 surveys, rejecting modern shifts due to accretion.[130] Water enforcement disputes persist; in Texas v. New Mexico (2024), the Court imposed a gradual reduction plan for New Mexico's diversions under the 1938 Rio Grande Compact to address deficits exceeding 100,000 acre-feet yearly, incorporating federal Rio Grande Project operations.[131][132] Groundwater disputes emerged later; Mississippi v. Tennessee (2021) dismissed claims of equitable liability for Memphis Aquifer depletion, ruling no general duty exists absent compact or riparian principles, as extraction occurred within state borders despite hydrologic interdependence.[133] Compact withdrawal challenges, like New York v. New Jersey (2023), tested unilateral exits, with the Court deferring to compact terms allowing notice-based termination for the 1954 Fresh Kills Landfill agreement.[134] These mechanisms underscore federal oversight in preventing unilateral state actions that could escalate to broader conflicts, though critics note delays in adjudication—averaging years—exacerbate resource strains.[128]Interactions with foreign governments
The U.S. Constitution explicitly prohibits states from entering into treaties, alliances, or confederations with foreign powers, reserving foreign affairs powers primarily to the federal government under Article I, Section 10, Clause 1.[135] This restriction aims to prevent fragmented diplomacy that could undermine national unity, with the Supreme Court invalidating state actions that unduly interfere with federal foreign relations even absent explicit federal policy.[136] Despite these limits, states engage in "paradiplomacy" through non-binding economic and cultural initiatives, such as trade promotion and memoranda of understanding (MOUs), which do not require federal consent unless they resemble compacts affecting interstate or foreign commerce.[137] States maintain overseas trade offices to facilitate exports, attract investment, and build business networks, with 40 states operating such offices as of 2002, often in major markets like Europe, Asia, and Mexico.[138] For instance, New York operates a global network of trade directors who conduct market research and connect state firms with foreign partners.[139] These offices assist in identifying importers, organizing trade exhibitions, and negotiating commercial deals, boosting state economies without encroaching on federal treaty-making authority.[140] Texas, California, and others have similarly established representative offices in countries like Japan, Germany, and Taiwan to promote sectors such as energy, technology, and agriculture. Cultural and educational exchanges, including sister-state or sister-city agreements, further exemplify state-level interactions, fostering goodwill and indirect economic ties; over 500 such city pairings exist with Japanese localities alone, signed since the 1950s.[141] States also participate in inbound investment promotion, collaborating with foreign governments on issues like environmental cooperation or infrastructure, though federal courts scrutinize arrangements that could imply binding commitments.[137] These activities, while economically oriented, occasionally draw federal pushback if perceived to signal divergent policy, as in cases where state sanctions or procurement laws conflict with national agreements.[136] Overall, state engagements prioritize commerce over geopolitics, aligning with federal supremacy in diplomacy.Geography and Territorial Aspects
Border delineation and disputes
U.S. state boundaries are primarily established through acts of Congress during the admission of new states from federal territories or by colonial charters for the original thirteen states.[142] For the original colonies, borders derived from royal grants and charters issued by the British Crown, often following natural features such as rivers or vague descriptions along meridians and parallels.[143] Western states' borders were frequently delineated using straight lines of latitude and longitude to facilitate land surveys under the Public Land Survey System, prioritizing administrative efficiency over topography in sparsely settled areas.[144] Natural boundaries, including rivers and mountain ridges, were employed where practical, though shifts in river courses have occasionally prompted adjustments.[145] Boundary delineation often involved professional surveys, such as the Mason-Dixon line completed in 1767-1768 to resolve colonial disputes between Pennsylvania and Maryland.[143] Congress retained authority to define or alter boundaries upon state admission, as seen in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which outlined provisional territorial divisions later formalized into states like Ohio and Indiana.[146] Interstate compacts, requiring congressional approval, or Supreme Court rulings under Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, can modify boundaries post-admission.[147] Disputes over state borders have historically arisen from ambiguous enabling acts, survey inaccuracies, or competing territorial claims, with the U.S. Supreme Court exercising original jurisdiction to adjudicate most cases.[148] A prominent example is the Toledo War of 1835-1836 between Michigan Territory and Ohio, stemming from conflicting interpretations of the 1787 Northwest Ordinance's boundary along the Maumee River and Lake Erie; Congress resolved it in 1836 by granting Ohio the disputed Toledo Strip while compensating Michigan with the Upper Peninsula.[149] [150] Other notable disputes include Rhode Island v. Massachusetts (1838 onward), involving colonial charter ambiguities, and more recent cases like Alabama v. Mississippi (1985), which addressed shifts in the Mississippi River boundary affecting interstate commerce.[148] The Supreme Court has decided over 100 boundary cases since 1789, emphasizing equitable principles and historical evidence rather than strict equity rules.[151] Few active disputes remain, though occasional litigation occurs over river avulsions or erosion, as in Georgia v. South Carolina (1990) regarding the Savannah River.[148] Once settled, state borders are rarely altered, preserving territorial integrity absent mutual consent or federal intervention.[147]Regional classifications and physical features
The United States Census Bureau divides the 50 states into four main regions for data collection and statistical purposes: Northeast, Midwest, South, and West.[152] These regions are subdivided into nine divisions to reflect geographic and cultural similarities.[153] The Northeast includes the New England division (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont) and Middle Atlantic division (New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania).[7] The Midwest consists of the East North Central division (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin) and West North Central division (Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota).[7] The South encompasses the South Atlantic division (Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia), East South Central division (Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee), and West South Central division (Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas).[7] The West comprises the Mountain division (Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming) and Pacific division (Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington).[7]| Region | Divisions | States |
|---|---|---|
| Northeast | New England | Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont |
| Northeast | Middle Atlantic | New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania |
| Midwest | East North Central | Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin |
| Midwest | West North Central | Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota |
| South | South Atlantic | Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia |
| South | East South Central | Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee |
| South | West South Central | Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas |
| West | Mountain | Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming |
| West | Pacific | Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington |
Nomenclature and Identity
Etymology of state names
The names of the 50 U.S. states originate from a variety of sources, with approximately 26 deriving from Native American languages—often referencing tribes, rivers, or landscape features—while others stem from European royal honors, Spanish or French geographical descriptors, Latin terms, or English colonial place names.[157][158] This linguistic diversity underscores the interplay of indigenous peoples, European colonization, and territorial expansion, though some etymologies remain disputed due to inconsistent historical records or multiple proposed interpretations.[157]| State | Etymology |
|---|---|
| Alabama | Likely from the Choctaw words alba (vegetation) and amo (to gather), meaning "thicket-clearers," associated with a Native tribe of the Creek Confederacy that named a local river.[157][158] |
| Alaska | From the Aleut alaxsxaq, meaning "the mainland" or "object toward which the sea breaks."[157][158] |
| Arizona | Disputed; possibly from O'odham ali ṣonak ("little spring place") or Basque haritz ona ("good oak"); alternative proposals include Pima or Aztec terms for silver-bearing sites.[157][158] |
| Arkansas | From the Quapaw (Siouan) tribal name, a nasalized form of Kansa, used by upstream tribes for "people of the south wind."[157][158] |
| California | Uncertain; possibly from Spanish novelist Garci Ordóñez de Montalvo's 1510 fictional island paradise in Las sergas de Esplandián, or Latin calida fornax ("hot furnace") for thermal features.[157][158] |
| Colorado | Spanish for "colored red" (colorado), referring to the reddish tint of the Colorado River's sediment-laden waters; officially adopted by Congress in 1861.[157] |
| Connecticut | From Mohican quinnitukqut, meaning "at the long tidal river," describing the Connecticut River.[157][158] |
| Delaware | Named for Thomas West, Baron De La Warr (from Old French "of the war"), Virginia's colonial governor who explored the Delaware River and Bay in 1610.[157][158] |
| Florida | Spanish la Florida ("flowery" or "full of flowers"), coined by Juan Ponce de León in 1513 during Easter (Pascua Florida) amid lush vegetation.[157][158] |
| Georgia | Honors King George II of England, who granted the colony's charter in 1732; the suffix -ia denotes "land of."[157][158] |
| Hawaii | Disputed Polynesian origin; possibly from Hawaiʻi Loa (legendary discoverer), or hawa ("homeland") + ii ("small"), or simply the native name for the largest island.[157][158] |
| Idaho | Likely fabricated; proposed as Shoshone edah hoe ("light on the mountains") but actually coined by lobbyist George M. Willing as "gem of the mountains," later applied after rejection for Colorado.[157][158] |
| Illinois | From Illiniwek ("men" or "warriors" in Miami-Illinois), altered via Ojibwe and French pronunciation to Illinois.[157][158] |
| Indiana | Latin for "land of the Indians," reflecting early land purchases from Native tribes or the Indiana Territory's indigenous inhabitants.[157][158] |
| Iowa | From the Ioway (Ayuhwa) tribal name, possibly Dakota for "sleepy ones" or self-designation baxoje ("dusty-nosed" or "ashy snow").[157][158] |
| Kansas | From Kansa (Kaw) tribal name, a Siouan term possibly meaning "south wind people," Anglicized from French Cansez.[157][158] |
| Kentucky | Disputed; possibly Wyandot ken-tah-ten ("land of tomorrow"), Iroquois for "meadow land," or Shawnee for "at the head of a river."[157][158] |
| Louisiana | French La Louisiane, "land of Louis," honoring King Louis XIV; named by explorer René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle, in 1682.[157][158] |
| Maine | Disputed; possibly English "mainland" (contrasting coastal islands) or after the French province of Maine.[157][158] |
| Maryland | Honors Queen Henrietta Maria, wife of King Charles I, via a 1632 charter; Latinized as Terra Mariae ("Mary's land").[157][158] |
| Massachusetts | From Massachusett tribal name, meaning "at the great hill" (referencing the Blue Hills).[157][158] |
| Michigan | From Ojibwe mishigamaa ("large water" or "great lake"), referring to Lake Michigan.[157][158] |
| Minnesota | Dakota mní sóta ("sky-tinted water" or "cloudy water"), describing the Minnesota River's muddy hue.[157][158] |
| Mississippi | Ojibwe mísi-ziibi ("great river" or "father of waters").[157][158] |
| Missouri | Algonquian ouemessourita (tribal name), possibly "people of the big (dugout) canoe" or from the muddy Missouri River.[157][158] |
| Montana | Latin montana ("mountainous"), via Spanish montaña; adopted for the mountainous territory.[157][158] |
| Nebraska | Omaha or Otoe ñí brásge ("flat water"), for the Platte River.[157][158] |
| Nevada | Spanish nevada ("snowy" or "snow-covered"), for the Sierra Nevada mountains.[157][158] |
| New Hampshire | Named by Captain John Mason in 1623 after his English homeland, Hampshire County.[157][158] |
| New Jersey | Honors the Channel Island of Jersey, birthplace of colonist Sir George Carteret; Jersey's own etymology is debated (Latin Caesarea or Norse "Geirr's island").[157][158] |
| New Mexico | Spanish Nuevo México ("new Mexico"), possibly referencing the Valley of Mexico or Aztec migrations; origins unclear.[157][158] |
| New York | Named for James II, Duke of York, after England's 1664 conquest of Dutch New Amsterdam.[157][158] |
| North Carolina | From Latin Carolus ("Charles"), honoring King Charles I or II; split from unified Carolina in 1712.[157][158] |
| South Carolina | From Latin Carolus ("Charles"), honoring King Charles I or II; split from unified Carolina in 1712.[157][158] |
| North Dakota | Sioux Dakȟóta ("allies" or "friends"), from the Dakota Territory; split in 1889.[157][158] |
| South Dakota | Sioux Dakȟóta ("allies" or "friends"), from the Dakota Territory; split in 1889.[157][158] |
| Ohio | Seneca ohi:yo’ ("good river"), for the Ohio River.[157][158] |
| Oklahoma | Choctaw okla humma ("red people"), referring to the Choctaw or Chickasaw.[157][158] |
| Oregon | Uncertain; possibly Algonquian wauregan (via Ohio River) or Chinook ooligan (candlefish); first attested in 1765 writings.[157][158] |
| Pennsylvania | Latin Penn's sylvania ("Penn's woods"), honoring Admiral William Penn (father of founder William Penn).[157][158] |
| Rhode Island | Disputed; possibly Dutch Roodt Eylandt ("red island") for clay shores, or explorer Giovanni da Verrazzano's comparison to Greek Rhodes.[157][158] |
| Tennessee | From Cherokee village Tanasi, meaning unknown (possibly "meeting place" or "river bend").[157][158] |
| Texas | Caddo taysha ("friend" or "ally"), Hispanicized by Spanish explorers.[157][158] |
| Utah | Spanish yuta, from the Ute tribal name; possibly meaning "people of the mountains" or "god's people," though disputed.[157][158] |
| Vermont | French vert mont ("green mountain"), coined in 1763 by settlers describing the Green Mountains; unusually lacks typical French feminine article.[157][158] |
| Virginia | Latin for "virgin," honoring Queen Elizabeth I as the "Virgin Queen" by Sir Walter Raleigh in the 1580s.[157][158] |
| Washington | Honors George Washington, first U.S. president; named in the 1850s, distinct from D.C.'s original Columbia reference.[157] |
| West Virginia | Retains "Virginia" from the parent state, formed in 1863 during the Civil War; alternatives like Kanawha were rejected.[157][158] |
| Wisconsin | Miami-Illinois for the Wisconsin River, possibly "it lies red" (referencing reddish sandstone) or "where the waters gather"; French-altered to Ouisconsin.[157][158] |
| Wyoming | Munsee Delaware xwəwamənk ("at the large river plain" or "extensive plains"); popularized by a Pennsylvania valley's name from 18th-century poetry.[157][158] |