Former French colonies like Louisiana lack the French culture and language laws (and active separatist movements) of Quebec. I know people speak Louisiana Creole but my understanding is that is a small part of the overall population and it isn't as formal of a version of the French language as spoken in Quebec. And people in Louisiana aren't trying to secede from the US to preserve their French heritage. This is despite Louisiana transferring from France to the US more recently than Quebec transferred from France to the British Crown. So what caused this divergence? How did the US do a better job of integrating former French territories than Canada did?
There's always more to be said, but in the meantime you can find some answers in this thread.
After the conquest of Quebec in 1759, the British granted generous language, religious and property concessions to the roughly 80,000 French colonists of New France, who they now had to absorb into British North America as new subjects. This was the opposite of what they had done to the Acadians in the Maritimes in the 1750's, when they forcibly exiled the entire French population -- with many of them moving to Louisiana.
The British had initially hoped that, over time, English Protestant settlers from New England and Britain would outnumber the French and the colony of Quebec would soon be assimilated into British culture. This didn't happen, in part, because the legal protections they granted in Quebec ensured the survival of the French language, Catholic faith and civil code in the colony -- all of which made settlement there unappealing to English Protestants. New England was outraged at the fair treatment of French Catholics, who they regarded as the enemy.
Unlike in Louisiana, Quebec was largely a homogenous culture with one faith, as only Catholics were permitted to settle in New France since the 1600s. Quebec City was the colonial capital (Montreal, the commercial one) and remained the political, cultural and spiritual heart of French North America, even after the conquest.
Louisiana had more of a melting pot of cultural and linguistic influences: Acadian, Spanish, Creole etc. It became part of the Spanish empire in the aftermath of the Seven Years War and while their Quebec cousins lived in relative peace under British rule with their rights guaranteed under law, the French in Louisiana had to endure the indifferent rule of absentee landlord Spain. Louisiana only briefly returned to the French fold when Napoleon acquired it from Spain, only to sell it to the U.S. soon after.
Later, waves of English Protestant settlers (who had no love for French or Catholics) and past state and federal policies designed to anglicize the population would, arguably, achieve in America what the British did not in Canada: the assimilation of a local French population. The debate within the modern Louisiana French diaspora is what version of French should be considered "Louisiane French", with its varied Cajun and Creole influences and dialects. Should they study Quebecois French spoken in Montreal, or Acadian French as spoken in the Maritimes due to their closer cultural ties, etc.
This sort of cultural struggle and threat of assimilation drove the Quebecois to resist American invasion in 1775 and 1812, and later, the influx of English-language media, TV, radio in the 20th cen. They were not fond of their British rulers -- but they trusted the Americans even less. The British legal concessions after 1759 (and enshrined in law in the 1774 Quebec Act) largely insulated them from the danger of assimilation that their Louisiana cousins endured over time, but they still worry about the threat of cultural and linguistic assimilation in North America.