The literature on Latino politics has emphasized the unique importance of immigration as a galvanizing issue for the community. Numerous studies have found that, in the aggregate, Latinos are attentive to immigration policy and oppose candidates who take restrictionist positions. However, it is unclear how Latinos navigate trade-offs when deeply-held issue positions conflict with group-relevant policies. In this paper, I design a dynamic tailored conjoint experiment that examines whether immigration or deeply-held issue positions elicited in an open-ended question are stronger determinants of candidate choice. I consistently find that the effects of core issue positions on candidate choice are larger than the effects of immigration stances across two online samples of Latinos. Implications for the literature on issue importance, cross-pressures, and Latino politics are discussed.