In a legal clash between Florida and the federal government, the two entities confronted each other this week in an appeals court over the state’s pursuit to legally contest Biden administration policies resulting in the release of undocumented immigrants from detention.
The dispute unfolded at the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, with lawyers from both camps submitting briefs late Monday. Governor Ron DeSantis and Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody have prominently criticized the Biden administration’s approach to immigration matters. However, last year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Texas and Louisiana lacked legal standing to challenge specific immigration policies.
Following the Supreme Court’s decision, the Atlanta-based appeals court directed Florida and the federal government to submit briefs addressing whether the state had standing to challenge the so-called “parole” policies.
Legal representatives from Moody’s office argued in their 35-page brief that the Supreme Court’s ruling did not preclude Florida’s challenge. They contended that the Texas and Louisiana case centered on issues related to the arrest of migrants, whereas Florida’s challenge pertained to paroling individuals already detained.
“Texas (the Texas and Louisiana case) involved the executive branch’s historic discretion to enforce federal law,” the state’s brief stated. “But here, the challenged policies are much more than a mere failure to enforce the law. They instead confer temporary legal status and other statutory benefits in the form of parole.”
However, in their 34-page response, lawyers from the U.S. Department of Justice dismissed such a distinction as “immaterial,” asserting that both cases revolve around policies endowed with discretion.
“Here, DHS’s (the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s) parole policies reflected decisions about how to best use its limited resources to process and detain noncitizens who unlawfully entered the United States during particular periods of time,” the Justice Department brief argued.