Faced with the possibility of a federal judge holding him in contempt or sanctioning him, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier argued in a court filing Monday that he complied with a temporary restraining order that blocked a new state law on immigration enforcement.
Lawyers for Uthmeier filed an 18-page document after U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams ordered the attorney general to “show cause” why he should not be held in contempt or sanctioned because of an April 23 letter he sent to law enforcement agencies.
Williams on April 4 issued a temporary restraining order to block enforcement of the law and extended the restraining order April 18. Ultimately, she issued a longer-lasting preliminary injunction on April 29, saying the law was likely unconstitutional.
Uthmeier argued, however, that the temporary restraining order should have only applied to named defendants in the lawsuit — him and local state attorneys — and not to law enforcement officers.
In her April 29 decision approving the preliminary injunction and issuing the show-cause order, Williams cited arrests that continued after the temporary restraining order and quoted from Uthmeier’s April 23 letter, which she said included an effort to “counsel law enforcement” that they were not restrained from enforcing the law.
But in the document filed Monday, Uthmeier’s lawyers said he complied with the temporary restraining order by not enforcing the law (SB 4-C) and notifying law enforcement agencies about the temporary restraining order. It said Uthmeier was free to express his disagreement with Williams’ decision in the April 23 letter.
“The attorney general has consistently abided by the court’s order to cease enforcing (the law),” the document said. “Nowhere does the TRO (expressly or impliedly) require the attorney general to refrain from sharing his views about the order with law enforcement.”
But in ordering Uthmeier to show cause, Williams interpreted the April 23 letter differently. She wrote that Uthmeier sent an April 18 letter notifying law enforcement agencies to refrain from enforcing the law but then sent the April 23 letter “reversing his prior directive.”
“It said, ‘I cannot prevent you from enforcing (the law), where there remains no judicial order that properly restrains you from doing so,’ ” Williams wrote. “Aside from the clear misstatement that there is ‘no judicial order’ that restrains law enforcement from arresting individuals pursuant to SB 4-C, AG Uthmeier’s assessment that the order does not ‘properly’ restrain them demonstrates his active effort to counsel law enforcement.”
But in the filing Monday, Uthmeier’s lawyers said Williams’ reading of the April 23 letter “relies on one portion of one sentence, rather than reading (the) letter as a whole and in the context of what preceded it: the April 18 letter” and a legal brief that also was filed April 23.
“In the April 23 letter, the attorney general expressly reiterated the court’s conclusion that the TRO ‘bound’ the letter’s recipients,” Uthmeier’s lawyers wrote. “He explained — as he had in the April 18 letter — that he believed the court’s conclusion as to permissible scope of the TRO was ‘wrong,’ and he noted that the April 18 letter had promised his ‘office would be arguing as much in short order.’ ”
The law, passed during a February special legislative session, created state crimes for immigrants in the country without legal status who enter or reenter Florida. The Republican-controlled Legislature said the law was aimed at helping carry out President Donald Trump’s policies on preventing illegal immigration.
The Florida Immigrant Coalition, the Farmworker Association of Florida and two individuals filed the lawsuit April 2, alleging, in part, that the law violates what is known as the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution because immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility.
In issuing the preliminary injunction, Williams said the law likely was preempted by federal immigration authority. Among other things, she pointed to the law requiring that violators go to jail.
“First, it gives state officials authority to prosecute illegal entry or reentry in cases where federal actors may choose not to,” the judge wrote. “Even if federal and state officials choose to commence parallel dual prosecutions under both laws, SB 4-C’s mandatory detention provision limits federal law enforcement discretion to recommend pretrial release and obstructs federal courts’ ability to conduct proceedings requiring defendants’ presence. Relatedly, state officials are free to prosecute a charge under SB 4-C even while a federal immigration proceeding is underway, which may determine that the defendant may remain lawfully present under federal law.”
Uthmeier’s office quickly appealed the preliminary injunction and followed by asking for a stay while the Atlanta-based appeals court considers the underlying issues. The motion for a stay, in part, disputed that the law improperly infringed on federal immigration authority.
“To aid the United States in curbing illegal immigration within the state’s borders, SB 4-C criminalizes the entry into Florida of those who have illegally entered the United States,” the motion said. “That law tracks federal law to a tee. It also retains federal law defenses and says nothing of who should be admitted or removed from the country.”
The appeals court had not ruled on the motion for a stay as of Tuesday morning. Williams has scheduled a May 29 hearing in Miami on whether to hold Uthmeier in contempt or sanction him.
