Florida's attorney general appeals judge's contempt finding in immigration case
Uthmeier's lawyers last week filed a notice of appealing U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams' ruling to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
As is common, the notice does not detail arguments that Uthmeier will make at the Atlanta-based appeals court. But the appeal is the latest move in an unusual dispute between Uthmeier and the Miami-based judge.
The issue stems from a law, passed during a February special legislative session, that created state crimes for undocumented immigrants who enter or re-enter Florida. The Florida Immigrant Coalition, the Farmworker Association of Florida and two individual plaintiffs filed a lawsuit on April 2, contending, 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.
Williams on April 4 issued a temporary restraining order to block enforcement of the law. She extended the temporary restraining order April 18 and directed Uthmeier to send a letter notifying police agencies that they could not enforce the law. The directive came after reports of arrests. Uthmeier sent such a letter April 18 but followed with an April 23 letter that spurred the contempt issue.
Uthmeier has argued that the temporary restraining order — and a longer-lasting preliminary injunction issued later — should only apply to him and local state attorneys because they were the named defendants in the underlying legal challenge to the law (SB 4-C).
In the April 23 letter to police agencies, Uthmeier reiterated that position and said he could not prevent police from enforcing the law 'where there remains no judicial order that properly restrains you from doing so,' according to Williams' June 17 contempt ruling.
Williams said that statement and other wording in the letter violated her order, writing that in a 'variety of ways, Uthmeier's April 23rd letter conveyed to law enforcement that they could and should disregard the April 18th letter's message that they were required by court order to cease enforcement of SB 4-C.'
'Uthmeier's role endows him with a unique capacity to uphold or undermine the rule of law, and when he does the latter by violating a court order, the integrity of the legal system depends on his conduct being within the court's remedial reach,' Williams wrote in the 27-page contempt ruling.
In a court filing in May, Uthmeier's lawyers said he complied with the temporary restraining order by not enforcing the law and notifying law-enforcement agencies about the temporary restraining order. The filing 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.'
The filing also 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.
To carry out the contempt finding, Williams ordered Uthmeier to file bi-weekly reports about whether any arrests, detentions or other law-enforcement actions had occurred under the blocked law — filings he has submitted.
Williams on April 29 issued a preliminary injunction to continue blocking the law, saying it likely was preempted by federal immigration-enforcement authority. In part, she pointed to the law requiring that violators go to jail and indicated that could conflict with federal authority.
Uthmeier also has appealed the preliminary-injunction ruling to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. He asked the appeals court and the U.S. Supreme Court for a stay of the preliminary injunction but was turned down. Such a stay would have allowed enforcement of the law while the legal battle plays out.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
Crypto lobby gains ground under Trump
At least 27 crypto companies or advocates filed their first-ever lobbying disclosures this year across some 20 firms, reflecting an increasing appetite for influence in a more crypto-friendly Washington. The newcomers originate from all corners of the industry. There's betting website Polymarket, a gaming company that created an NFT version of the White House Easter egg hunt, and a Seychelles-based exchange that cannot operate in the U.S. market due to a federal money laundering settlement. Together, they spent nearly $2.8 million between April 1 and June 30 on lobbying landmark legislation promoting digital assets to the Treasury Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission, and a host of other issues relevant to blockchain infrastructure — an increasingly sprawling ecosystem that some hope could one day be as ubiquitous as the internet. The push has paid off for crypto so far. The GENIUS Act, a bill with bipartisan support signed by President Trump last week, has been regarded as the government's 'seal of approval' on the industry. The law sets up a regulatory framework for stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency that is theoretically pegged to the U.S. dollar or another reference asset. The House also advanced several other landmark bills during its monumental 'crypto week,' which featured high-profile lobbying stunts such as vending machines around the Capitol and the National Mall with customized chocolate bars urging 'yes' votes, bankrolled by the crypto exchange Coinbase. Lobbying expenses that week were not covered in the second quarter disclosures. At least 73 companies or associations focused on crypto disclosed federal lobbying activities, to the tune of about $11.4 million. This total doesn't include spending from investment firms such as Andreessen Horowitz ($790,000) or BlackRock ($810,000) that have substantial crypto interests but also lobbied on a suite of other financial regulation issues. The Hill's Miriam Waldvogel has more here.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Judge blocks Trump's birthright citizenship restrictions in third ruling since high court decision
Advertisement Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'The record does not support a finding that any narrower option would feasibly and adequately protect the plaintiffs from the injuries they have shown they are likely to suffer,' Sorokin wrote. A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a ruling earlier this month prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week, his order went into effect. On Wednesday, a San Francisco-based appeals court found the president's executive order unconstitutional and affirmed a lower court's nationwide block. Advertisement A Maryland-based judge said this week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional. Plaintiffs in the Boston case earlier argued that the principle of birthright citizenship is 'enshrined in the Constitution,' and that Trump does not have the authority to issue the order, which they called a 'flagrantly unlawful attempt to strip hundreds of thousands of American-born children of their citizenship based on their parentage.' They also argue that Trump's order halting automatic citizenship for babies born to people in the U.S. illegally or temporarily would cost states funding they rely on to 'provide essential services' — from foster care to health care for low-income children, to 'early interventions for infants, toddlers, and students with disabilities.' At the heart of the lawsuits is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified in 1868 after the Civil War and the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision. That decision found that Scott, an enslaved man, wasn't a citizen despite having lived in a state where slavery was outlawed. The Trump administration has asserted that children of noncitizens are not 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States and therefore not entitled to citizenship.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Federal education funding to be released, offering relief to Florida schools
Close to $400 million in federal grants promised to Florida school districts will be released by the Trump administration, according to reports. As of yesterday, the $35 million in funds promised to Miami-Dade County Public Schools remained frozen. Earlier this month, the figure was $10 million higher, but some funds were released for after-school programs. In Broward, at least $30 million in funds were promised to the school district and then frozen. Nationwide, more than $5 billion in public school funding had been placed on hold. The freeze began June 30, just one day before the grants were expected to arrive. The White House Office of Management and Budget has been reviewing the funds to determine whether they were being used to support a 'radical leftwing agenda.' 'It is incredible, encouraging news that we do not have to hold back on certain areas,' said Miami-Dade Superintendent Jose L. Dotres. 'It will allow us to continue improving the trajectory of the school district and the services we provide to our community.' Dotres had been lobbying lawmakers in Tallahassee and Washington, D.C., to release the funding for the past few weeks, and had already started making cuts for the upcoming year, such as cutting purchases on textbook, supplies, and delaying certain teacher training programs. Now, the district will be able to proceed as usual. In Miami-Dade, the grants fund programs such as English language learning, science and technology innovation, teacher training, migrant education and adult education. John J. Sullivan, chief communications officer for Broward schools, said he is grateful the funds will soon be released. 'These critical resources allow us to continue providing essential services and supports for our students, families, and schools,' said Sullivan. Ron Steiger, the Miami-Dade school district's chief financial officer, said he received multiple texts with links to news articles announcing the release of funds. Though he has not yet received formal notice from the U.S. Department of Education, he said he was relieved. 'Nothing actually ended up harming anything,' he said, adding that he believed this outcome was the most likely all along. Two lawsuits related to the funding freeze are still active. One, brought by 24 states and the District of Columbia, asked a federal judge in Rhode Island to order the release of the funds. Florida was not a party to that suit. A second case was filed by a coalition of organizations—including the Florida Parent Teacher Association and P.S. 305, a Miami education advocacy group—in the same court. On Wednesday, a judge agreed to consider the two cases together. A hearing for emergency relief is scheduled for Aug. 13. Despite the administration's announcement, Florida PTA President-elect Jude Bruno said the legal challenge remains necessary. 'The harm still exists until school districts actually receive the funds or, at the very least, are issued award and grant issuance letters with clear timelines for when to expect them,' Bruno said in a text message to the Miami Herald. Mina Hosseini, executive director of P.S. 305 agreed that this is not the end of what she says is a school 'system chronically starved of resources.' 'The future of public education cannot be left vulnerable to political whims—it must be protected by the people,' she told the Miami Herald. An administrative assistant for Mari Tere Rojas, the chair of the Miami-Dade school board, said in a statement, 'These programs, which enjoy bipartisan support, are vital for the operation and functioning of our local public schools for this upcoming school year.' Ray Hart, executive director of the Council of the Great City Schools, a coalition of school districts, said in a statement that he is 'relieved' the Education Department has released the remainder of the funds authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 'for the benefit of schoolchildren throughout our nation.' School board member Steve Gallon also welcomed the news—but issued a warning. He expressed frustration that some elected leaders had remained silent 'in the face of what could potentially devastate the learning and lives of children and families… Seemingly shackled by fear and partisanship,' he said in a text message. 'I am concerned that this is not the end,' he added.
