Off the top of my head, the answer is no. The only situation in which a boycott of an entire region occurred in response to racial discrimination was the boycott of South Africa that many countries imposed on their sporting teams. There were instances of boycotts against South Africa from the early 1960s right up until the end of Apartheid in 1995. They weren't limited to sports either - academic and economic boycotts were in place too.

In America however, the extent of boycotts was localised. Montgomery has the most famous example, and shows exactly how effective a boycott can be. The bus boycott there went on for so long that whites began trying to figure out a way to end it by any means possible. The buses were the only transport for many blacks to the downtown shopping district of Montgomery. By removing the buses from the equation, visitors downtown stopped, and profits fell.

The reason I would suggest there weren't boycotts of entire states is because it wasn't really an effective measure. Mississippi as an example, was referred to as a state where only the bravest activists would go because of the attitude they had there to the movement and to those supporting equal rights. But if the state was to be boycotted, it would effectively isolate the black population in Mississippi and stop them from gaining anything from the efforts of the movement.

To use a medical metaphor, the goal wasn't to cut away the diseased parts of racism, but rather to cure it and retain the whole as a healthy specimen. A boycott of a state would leave isolate those who needed help the most.