On Tuesday, an Eleventh Circuit panel consisting of Chief Judge Pryor, Judge Brasher, and Judge Abudu heard oral argument on the so-called “Alligator Alcatraz” case. Jesse Panuccio argued for the State of Florida, Adam Gustafson argued for the Federal Government, Paul Schwiep argued for the environmental groups, and Elliot Kula argued for the Miccosukee Tribe.
The panel focused on whether the federal government’s involvement with the immigrant detention facility was sufficient to trigger the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The appeal challenges a preliminary injunction issued by Judge Williams in August that effectively required the temporary shutdown of the facility pending environmental review.
Mr. Panuccio and Mr. Gustafson emphasized that the detention site is state-owned, state-built, and state-controlled and thus the injunction incorrectly held that Florida was subject to NEPA and incorrectly limited state action. Mr. Schwiep countered that the facility exists solely to serve a federal immigration function and would not exist “but for” federal enforcement needs. In the appellees' view, Florida effectively outsourced federal immigration detention, making federal law applicable despite nominal state ownership or control. Mr. Kula emphasized the robust findings of fact made by Judge Williams which he argued are entitled to discretion.
It was an interesting issue and well argued. The full oral argument is available at this link. The case is Friends of the Everglades, Inc. v. Secretary of the United States, case number 25-12873.
No comments:
Post a Comment