This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . The next check for changes will be
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/aug/19/alligator-alcatraz-split-ruling-miami
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ civil rights case sees split ruling from Miami judge | ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ civil rights case sees split ruling from Miami judge |
| (32 minutes later) | |
| Civil rights lawyers say immigrants at the Everglades site lack confidential access to counsel as judge moves case | Civil rights lawyers say immigrants at the Everglades site lack confidential access to counsel as judge moves case |
| A federal judge in Miami issued a split decision in a lawsuit over the legal rights of detainees at the immigration detention center in the Florida Everglades known as “Alligator Alcatraz”, dismissing part of the suit and also moving the case to a different jurisdiction. | A federal judge in Miami issued a split decision in a lawsuit over the legal rights of detainees at the immigration detention center in the Florida Everglades known as “Alligator Alcatraz”, dismissing part of the suit and also moving the case to a different jurisdiction. |
| US district judge Rodolfo Ruiz issued the decision late on Monday, writing in a 47-page ruling that claims the detainees at the facility do not have confidential access to their lawyers or to hearings in immigration court were rendered moot when the Trump administration recently designated the Krome North processing center near Miami as a site for their cases to be heard. | |
| The judge heard arguments from both sides in a hearing earlier on Monday in Miami. Civil rights attorneys were seeking a preliminary injunction to ensure detainees at the facility have access to their lawyers and can get a hearing. | |
| The state and federal government had argued that even though the isolated airstrip where the facility is located is owned by Miami-Dade county, Florida’s southern district was the wrong venue since the detention center is located in neighboring Collier county, which is in the state’s middle district. | The state and federal government had argued that even though the isolated airstrip where the facility is located is owned by Miami-Dade county, Florida’s southern district was the wrong venue since the detention center is located in neighboring Collier county, which is in the state’s middle district. |
| Judge Ruiz had hinted during a hearing last week that he had some concerns over which jurisdiction was appropriate. | Judge Ruiz had hinted during a hearing last week that he had some concerns over which jurisdiction was appropriate. |
| “Much has changed since the complaint’s filing,” Ruiz wrote. | “Much has changed since the complaint’s filing,” Ruiz wrote. |
| Six of the plaintiffs have met with lawyers through videoconference, though they claimed the conferences are not confidential since they are not in an enclosed room and staff is close by and in listening proximity to the detainees. | Six of the plaintiffs have met with lawyers through videoconference, though they claimed the conferences are not confidential since they are not in an enclosed room and staff is close by and in listening proximity to the detainees. |
| A subset of detainees alleged they are eligible for bond hearings and their lawyers have been “unable to access – yet alone identify – the proper court for those hearings”. | A subset of detainees alleged they are eligible for bond hearings and their lawyers have been “unable to access – yet alone identify – the proper court for those hearings”. |
| But Ruiz noted the facts in the case changed on Saturday, when the Trump administration designated the Krome facility as the immigration court with jurisdiction over all detainees at the detention center. | |
| Ruiz wrote that the case had “a tortured procedural history” since it was filed on 16 July, weeks after the first group of detainees arrived at the facility. | |
| “Nearly every aspect of the Plaintiffs’ civil action – their causes of action, their facts in support, their theories of venue, their arguments on the merits and their requests for relief – have changed with each filing,” the judge wrote. | “Nearly every aspect of the Plaintiffs’ civil action – their causes of action, their facts in support, their theories of venue, their arguments on the merits and their requests for relief – have changed with each filing,” the judge wrote. |
| The judge granted the state defendants’ change of venue motion to the middle district of Florida, where the remaining claims of first amendment violations will be addressed. | |
| The state and federal government defendants made an identical argument last week about jurisdiction for a second lawsuit in which environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe sued to stop further construction and operations at the Everglades detention center until it is in compliance with federal environmental laws. | |
| US district judge Kathleen Williams in Miami on 7 August ordered a 14-day halt on additional construction at the site while witnesses testified at a hearing that wrapped up last week. She has said she plans to issue a ruling before the order expires later this week. She had yet to rule on the venue question. | US district judge Kathleen Williams in Miami on 7 August ordered a 14-day halt on additional construction at the site while witnesses testified at a hearing that wrapped up last week. She has said she plans to issue a ruling before the order expires later this week. She had yet to rule on the venue question. |
Previous version
1
Next version