A new state law targeting undocumented immigrants who enter Florida should remain blocked as a legal battle plays out, attorneys challenging the law argued in a filing Friday at a federal appeals court.
The attorneys, representing the Florida Immigrant Coalition, the Farmworker Association of Florida and two individual plaintiffs, pushed back against a request by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier for a stay of a preliminary injunction that U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams issued to block the law.
Williams ruled last month that the law likely was preempted by federal immigration authority. Among other things, she pointed to the law (SB 4-C) requiring that violators go to jail.
Uthmeier’s office quickly appealed to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and asked for a stay of the preliminary injunction. If such a stay is granted, the law could be enforced while the court case continues.
But in the filing Friday, attorneys for the plaintiffs wrote that Williams joined other courts across the country that have considered similar laws “in holding that this effort at state immigration lawmaking is preempted by the exhaustive federal regulation of the entry of noncitizens.”
The filing cited a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court decision in an Arizona case that said the federal government “has broad, undoubted power” over immigration-related issues.
ALSO READ: AG Uthmeier responds to contempt threat from judge who blocked Florida immigration law
“Exercising that power, Congress has enacted a pervasive system in the Immigration and Nationality Act to regulate entry into and continued presence in the United States,” the filing said. “This system includes federal offenses for unlawful entry and reentry into the country, which are prosecuted in federal court at the discretion of federal prosecutors, subject to rules and exceptions specified by Congress. This system also includes processes by which noncitizens may be detained pending a decision on whether they are to be removed, including full removal proceedings with trial-like processes subject to administrative and judicial appeals and numerous protections that are available despite unlawful entry.”
The law, passed during a February special legislative session, created state crimes for undocumented immigrants who enter or re-enter Florida. The Republican-controlled Legislature said the law was aimed at helping carry out President Donald Trump’s policies on preventing illegal immigration.
In a May 7 motion asking the Atlanta-based appeals court for a stay of Williams’ ruling, Uthmeier’s office 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.”
Uthmeier’s office also separately asked Williams for a stay of her injunction amid the appeal. As of early Monday afternoon, Williams had not ruled on that request. In also seeking a stay from the appeals court, Uthmeier’s office argued that Williams’ delay in ruling effectively was a failure to provide a stay.
The plaintiffs in the case are represented by attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans for Immigrant Justice and Community Justice Project. The lawsuit, filed April 2 in Miami, alleges, 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. The lawsuit names as defendants Uthmeier and local state attorneys.
In the filing Friday, the plaintiffs’ attorneys argued that Florida “cannot claim any harm from being unable to enforce a preempted law.”
“For over a century, the Supreme Court has made clear that states are barred from enforcing a law like SB 4-C,” the filing said. “Courts across the country (have) done the same. Thus, Florida’s argument that it has suffered irreparable injury from having its preempted law enjoined, is unavailing.”
