Environmental groups urge appeals court panel to lift halt on closing Florida's 'Alligator Alcatraz'

Questions by the three appellate judges during oral arguments in a Miami courtroom focused on how much control the federal government had over the state-built facility and under what circumstances an environmental review was required to be in compliance with federal law. The judges did not indicate when they would rule.

Jesse Panuccio, an attorney for the Florida Department of Emergency Management, told the judges federal funding and federal control of the facility were the two criteria for determining if the federal environmental law would apply and the federal agencies had no control over the state-run detention center.

Florida was notified in late September that FEMA had approved $608 million in federal funding to support the center’s construction and operation.

“You need both,” Panuccio said. “Even with funding, I don’t think that would follow because they don’t have federal control.”

An attorney for the environmental groups said the law requiring a review applied to the facility because the U.S. Department of Homeland Security had authorized the funding and immigration was a responsibility of the federal government, not the state. There only needed to be “substantial federal control” and not complete control, said Paul Schwiep, an attorney representing the Friends of the Everglades and the Center for Biological Diversity.

Chief Judge William Pryor, who was appointed to the appellate court by President George W. Bush, responded, “It's not federally controlled when the state retains authority to make decisions.”

Judge Nancy Abudu, who was named to the appellate court by President Joe Biden, asked an attorney for the federal government if states can be in charge of immigration matters. Adam Gustafson responded that the federal government can delegate certain responsibilities to states.

"Is it also, once the federal government gives the states its authority, it’s the ‘Wild, Wild West?’ Abudu asked.

The federal district judge in Miami in mid-August ordered the facility to wind down operations over two months because officials had failed to do a review of the detention center’s environmental impact according to federal law. That judge concluded that a reimbursement decision already had been made. The appellate court halted the order on an appeal.

The environmental lawsuit was one of three federal court challenges to the Everglades facility since it opened. In the others, a detainee said Florida agencies and private contractors hired by the state had no authority to operate the center under federal law. The challenge ended after the immigrant detainee who filed the lawsuit agreed to be removed from the United States.

In the third lawsuit, a federal judge in Fort Myers, Florida, ruled the Everglades facility must provide detainees there with better access to their attorneys, as well as confidential, unmonitored and unrecorded outgoing legal calls.

Follow Mike Schneider on the social platform Bluesky: @mikeysid.bsky.social.