Which U.S. states experienced the largest changes in estimated unauthorized immigrant populations between 2019 and 2023 according to CMS, Pew, and MPI?
Executive summary
Three leading estimates—Migration Policy Institute (MPI), Pew Research Center, and the Center for Migration Studies (CMS)—agree that the unauthorized immigrant population rose notably between 2019 and 2023, and that the largest absolute concentrations (and therefore the largest absolute increases) are concentrated in the nation’s biggest immigrant‑destination states—California, Texas, Florida and New York—though each research team uses different methods and produces different totals (MPI finds a rise from about 10.7 million to 13.7 million; Pew reports 14.0 million in 2023; CMS published provisional higher‑level estimates for 2023) [1] [2] [3].
1. MPI’s read: biggest absolute growth clustered in major gateway states
MPI’s mid‑2023 profiles show that roughly half of unauthorized immigrants lived in California, Texas, Florida or New York, and MPI highlights sharp growth in the unauthorized population between 2019 and mid‑2023—rising by about 3 million overall—implying the largest absolute increases occurred in those large states where the bulk of the population lives [4] [1]. MPI’s state and county data tool provides imputed state profiles using pooled ACS and SIPP data and explicitly covers 43 states plus D.C., supplying the methodological basis for locating growth geographically [5].
2. Pew’s read: broad, record‑setting increases that lift many states
Pew’s reweighted ACS‑based estimates conclude the U.S. unauthorized population reached about 14 million in July 2023—its highest estimate—and that the two‑year surge (2021–2023) was the largest on record; Pew also reports that the unauthorized population grew in 32 states between 2021 and 2023, indicating widespread increases beyond just traditional gateways [2] [6]. Pew’s emphasis is that the methodological reweighting to reflect updated international migration accounting changed state and national totals, and that its state‑level patterns reflect that broad, multi‑state growth even while the largest absolute numbers remain in the biggest states [7] [2].
3. CMS and other provisional estimates: corroboration but fewer publicized state rankings
CMS (Center for Migration Studies) provisional 2023 work is cited by scholars and policy analysts as showing an increase (for example, Robert Warren’s provisional estimate of 11.7 million for July 2023 is widely referenced), and CMS figures are used alongside MPI and Pew in comparative tables; however, the excerpts available here do not provide a clear, comparable state‑by‑state ranked list of 2019–2023 changes, limiting the ability to produce a definitive cross‑model state ranking from the provided materials alone [3] [8].
4. What the three sources converge on — and where they diverge
All three sources converge on a picture of substantial national increase and heavier concentration in California, Texas, Florida and New York, with MPI explicitly noting that half of the unauthorized population lived in those four states as of mid‑2023 [4] [1]. They diverge in totals (MPI ~13.7M mid‑2023; Pew 14.0M for July 2023; CMS provisional figures vary in reporting) and in methodological choices—MPI’s imputation using pooled ACS and SIPP, Pew’s reweighting of ACS to reflect revised international migration accounting, and CMS’s CPS‑based provisional series—so state‑level change magnitudes can shift depending on the model used [5] [7] [3].
5. Limitations, alternative interpretations and what is not in the sources
The available excerpts do not supply a single, side‑by‑side table of state‑level changes from 2019 to 2023 for MPI, Pew and CMS that would allow strict numeric ranking of which specific states experienced the very largest changes by each estimator; therefore, the most defensible, evidence‑based conclusion is that the largest absolute increases occurred in the country’s largest recipient states (CA, TX, FL, NY) while many other states also saw sizable growth (Pew: 32 states grew) — and precise inter‑state rank ordering differs by methodology and is not fully documented in the provided materials [4] [6] [5] [3].