Immigration advocates move again to block Florida transportation law in federal court

By Syra Ortiz Blanes

On August 14, 2023

Civil and immigration rights groups are moving to temporarily block part of Florida’s new immigration law, arguing that a provision that makes it a felony to transport undocumented immigrants into the state causes extreme hardships.

“Section 10 is inflicting enormous harm on Plaintiffs and countless other Florida residents,” according to the court documents asking for a preliminary injunction. “Florida has no valid basis to impose this kind of suffering on its residents.”

The attorneys for the groups initially filed the preliminary injunction last week. But Judge Roy Altman of the Florida Southern District Court turned down the request, telling them they had to show evidence they had served all the defendants with the initial complaint first. As of Monday, lawyers involved in the case had filed proof they had notified all defendants but one, and were moving quickly to refile the original motion for the preliminary injunction. If approved, the preliminary injunction would block the transportation provision while litigation takes place.

The legal action is part of a federal lawsuit, filed in July by the Southern Poverty Law Center, Americans for Immigrant Justice, the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida and others to block Section 10 of a new state law that creates several new immigration-related restrictions.

The part of the law being challenged says that people who “knowingly and willfully” transport someone into Florida who “the person knows, or reasonably should know, has entered the United States in violation of law and has not been inspected by the Federal Government since his or her unlawful entry from another country” will face third-degree felony charges.

“The community is terrified. And it’s not just anyone who is undocumented who is nervous. It’s faith leaders, family members. It’s anyone who provides transportation to the state,” said Anne Janet Hernandez Anderson, senior supervising attorney at the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The Farmworkers Association of Florida, a group of almost 12,000 members that advocates for migrant and seasonal farm workers, is the main plaintiff. Many of its members travel through Florida, Georgia, and Alabama to do agricultural work and have been doing so for a long time, said Nezahualcoyotl Xiuhtecutli, the association’s general coordinator.

“They are afraid of leaving the state whether to visit a relative or for work and not being able to return. They have always felt that they could move freely within the United States,” said Xiuhtecutli about some of his organization’s undocumented members. “But with this law, they feel they no longer have this type of free movement.”

A sworn declaration from Xiuhtecutli said the group expects that at least 100 families they know are not expected to return to Florida for September’s planting season. Xiuhtecutli also said that the law has diverted staff resources, leading to delays in submitting Medicaid and food stamp applications, as well as applications to other government welfare programs for members.

Other plaintiffs include a 70-year-old U.S. veteran turned Catholic deacon who views helping immigrants as part of his religious mission.

The lawsuit’s defendants are Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, state Attorney General Ashley Moody, and all county state attorneys. In May, when DeSantis signed the law that includes Section 10, his office described the bill as the “strongest anti-illegal immigration legislation in the country to combat Biden’s border crisis.”

THE LAWSUIT’S GROUNDS

The lawsuit argues that the state law, which went into effect July 1, is unconstitutional because it violates the Supremacy Clause, a constitutional provision that cements the authority of federal law over state law.

“The federal government is solely charged with the immigration system. There is federal law about any repercussions of transportation of folks who may have entered unlawfully,” said Katie Blankenship, deputy legal director for the ACLU of Florida, “States cannot pass laws that impede on areas that are strictly left to the federal government. And that’s what Section 10 does.”

The lawsuit also argues that the language in Section 10 is “hopelessly vague and incoherent,” because it’s unclear exactly what entering without federal government inspection means.

Lawyers for the rights groups told the Miami Herald that the scope of the law could include previously undocumented people who now have lawful immigration status or are now naturalized U.S. citizens, since these adjustments can happen without federal government inspection as defined by federal law.

“Nobody knows what inspection means in the context of this law. There are any number of people who could be impacted and people who the federal government knows are here…. So it’s impossible to know when you are violating it,” said Blankenship.

FARM WORKERS, A GRANDMOTHER, AND A NONPROFIT LEADER ARE AMONG THE PLAINTIFFS

The preliminary injunction filed last week includes several sworn statements from people, identified only by initials, who describe emotional, financial and social harm that the passage of Section 10 has inflicted upon their lives.

“Our plaintiffs show the profound human impact of who this law affects. We have families that are now afraid to travel together back into Florida, farmworkers who are now afraid to leave the state, coworkers who carpool, even married couples,” said Evelyn Wiese, attorney for the litigation program at Americans for Immigrant Justice.

One sworn statement came from a 57-year-old nonprofit director and U.S. citizen from rural Georgia identified as “AM” who helps immigrants seek medical care in northern Florida. He shared the story of an undocumented woman from the Mexican peninsula of Yucatan in his community who currently has renal failure.

“I am 100% willing to transport her to Florida or anywhere else she needs to go to get the care she needs. [The new law,] however, has made me extremely anxious that my efforts to help this woman may result in significant jail time and prosecution for me,” said AM.

Another case involves a young undocumented couple from Mexico with children who travel between Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee for work. The 33-year-old husband said that the family had decided to not leave Florida because of the law, and that he had struggled to find work over the summer. He took a landscaping job for less money, while his wife remains unemployed.

My children “asked why they don’t get to see their friends in Georgia and Tennessee this year and wonder if they will ever get to see them again. I don’t know what to say,” he said, “I do my best to keep going forward. But every day, we live in fear for our family’s future.”

There is also a sworn statement from a 72-year-old Nicaraguan grandmother with lupus from Florida City and her 19-year-old grandson, of whom she has custody. In light of the law, they canceled their trip to visit family members in Georgia. While the grandmother is a U.S. citizen, her grandson is still waiting on an application for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status. The grandmother said that the new law had aggravated the mental health of her grandson, who is a recent high school graduate.

And the grandmother fears what the law could mean for both of them if they ever risked crossing state lines to see their families.

“I do not know if I would even be able to survive being arrested and sent to jail,” she said, according to the sworn statement. “It also fills me with fear to think of my grandson being alone if I were arrested.”

This piece was republished from the Miami Herald.