Judge to hear arguments on halting ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ construction over environmental concerns

Last week she ordered a two-week halt on new construction that doesn’t include any restrictions on law enforcement or immigration enforcement activity at the center. (REUTERS)
Short Url
Updated 13 August 2025
Follow

Judge to hear arguments on halting ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ construction over environmental concerns

  • Lawyers are set to make their closing remarks Wednesday morning before US District Judge Kathleen Williams
  • Last week she ordered a two-week halt on new construction that doesn’t include any restrictions on law enforcement or immigration enforcement activity at the center

MIAMI: A federal judge is set to hear closing arguments Wednesday over whether to stop construction indefinitely at an immigrant detention center in the Florida Everglades dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz” as she considers whether it violates environmental laws.
US District Judge Kathleen Williams ordered a two-week halt on new construction last Thursday as witnesses continued to testify in a hearing to determine whether construction should end until the ultimate resolution of the case.
The temporary order doesn’t include any restrictions on law enforcement or immigration enforcement activity at the center, which is currently holding hundreds of detainees. The center, which was quickly built two months ago at a lightly used, single-runway training airport, is designed to eventually hold up to 3,000 detainees in temporary tent structures.
The order temporarily barred the installation of any new industrial-style lighting, as well as any paving, filling, excavating, fencing or erecting additional buildings, tents, dormitories or other residential or administrative facilities.
Environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe want Williams to issue a preliminary injunction to halt operations and further construction, which they say threatens environmentally sensitive wetlands that are home to protected plants and animals and would reverse billions of dollars’ worth of environmental restoration.
Plaintiffs presented witnesses Wednesday and Thursday who testified that the facility violates the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires federal agencies to assess the environmental effects of major construction projects.
Attorneys for the state and federal government have said that although the detention center would be holding federal detainees, the construction and operation of the facility is entirely under the state of Florida, meaning the federal environmental review wouldn’t apply.
The judge last week said the detention facility was, at a minimum, a joint partnership between the state and federal government.
Witnesses describe environmental threats
Witnesses for the environmental groups have testified that at least 20 acres (8 hectares) of asphalt have been added to the site since the Florida Division of Emergency Management began construction. They said additional paving could lead to an increase in water runoff to the adjacent wetlands, spread harmful chemicals into the Everglades and reduce the habitat for endangered Florida panthers.
Amy Castaneda, the Miccosukee Tribe’s water resource director, testified Tuesday that nutrient runoff from the detention center could flow into tribal lands, changing vegetation growth. That could lead to fish kills and block humans and wildlife from moving throughout certain areas, she said.
Marcel Bozas, director of the Miccosukee Tribe’s fish and wildlife department, said tribe members hunt and fish for subsistence and cultural reasons. Sustained human activity can drive away game animals, like whitetail deer, as well as protected species, like Florida panthers, wood storks, eastern black rails and bonneted bats, he said.
State official says Florida runs center
Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles executive director David Kerner testified that the 1,800 state troopers under his command are authorized to detain undocumented migrants under an agreement with the US Department of Homeland Security. He said the federal government doesn’t tell the state where to detain immigrants, and that the Everglades facility was built to alleviate overcrowding at federal immigration detention facilities, as well as state and county facilities with agreements to hold federal immigration detainees.
Kerner couldn’t say how many of the “Alligator Alcatraz” detainees have been charged with violent crimes or whether any other sites besides the middle of the Everglades were considered for possible detention centers.
Attorneys for federal and state agencies last month asked Williams to dismiss or transfer the injunction request, saying the lawsuit was filed in the wrong jurisdiction. Even though the property is owned by Miami-Dade County, Florida’s southern district is the wrong venue for the lawsuit because the detention center is in neighboring Collier County, which is in the state’s middle district, they said.
Williams had yet to rule on that argument.
Facility faces a second legal challenge
In a second legal challenge to “Alligator Alcatraz,” a federal judge over the weekend gave the state more time to prepare arguments against an effort to get the civil rights litigation certified as a class action.
US District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz in Miami said he will only consider a motion by detainees’ lawyers for a preliminary injunction during an Aug. 18 hearing. He set a Sept. 23 deadline for the state to respond to the detainee’s class action request. The second lawsuit claims detainees’ constitutional rights are being violated because they are barred from meeting lawyers, are being held without any charges, and a federal immigration court has canceled bond hearings.
The lawsuits were being heard as DeSantis′ administration apparently was preparing to build a second immigration detention center at a Florida National Guard training center in north Florida. At least one contract has been awarded for what is labeled in state records as the “North Detention Facility.”


Ukraine accuses Hungary, Slovakia of ‘blackmail’ over threats to cut electricity

Updated 3 sec ago
Follow

Ukraine accuses Hungary, Slovakia of ‘blackmail’ over threats to cut electricity

KYIV: Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry condemned what it described as “ultimatums and blackmail” by the governments of Hungary and Slovakia on Saturday, after they threatened to stop electricity supplies to ​Ukraine unless Kyiv restarts flows of Russian oil.
Shipments of Russian oil to Hungary and Slovakia have been cut off since January 27, when Kyiv says a Russian drone strike hit pipeline equipment in Western Ukraine. Slovakia and Hungary say Ukraine is to blame for the prolonged outage.
Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico said on Saturday that he would cut off emergency electricity supplies to Ukraine within two days unless Kyiv resumes Russian oil transit to Slovakia over Ukraine’s ‌territory. Hungary’s Viktor ‌Orban made a similar threat days earlier.
The issue ​has ‌become ⁠one of ​the ⁠angriest disputes yet between Ukraine and two neighbors that are members of the EU and NATO but whose leaders have bucked the largely pro-Ukrainian consensus in Europe to cultivate warm ties with Moscow.
Slovakia and Hungary are the only two EU countries that still rely on significant amounts of Russian oil shipped via the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline over Ukraine.
“Ukraine rejects and condemns the ultimatums and blackmail by the ⁠governments of Hungary and the Slovak Republic regarding energy supplies ‌between our countries,” the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry said ‌in a statement. “Ultimatums should be sent to the Kremlin, ​and certainly not to Kyiv.”

HUNGARY, ‌SLOVAKIA ARE KEY FOR UKRAINE’S ELECTRICITY IMPORTS
Between them, Hungary and Slovakia ‌have been providing around half of European emergency electricity exports to Ukraine, which Kyiv increasingly relies on as Russian attacks have damaged its grid.
“If oil supplies to Slovakia are not resumed on Monday, I will ask SEPS, the state-owned joint-stock company, to stop emergency electricity ‌supplies to Ukraine,” Fico said in a post on X.
Kyiv said that such actions were “provocative, irresponsible, and threaten the energy ⁠security of ⁠the entire region.”
Throughout the war that began with the full-scale Russian invasion whose fourth anniversary falls on Tuesday, Ukraine has allowed its territory to be used for Russian energy exports to Europe, which have been sharply curtailed but not halted.
Ukraine has proposed alternative transit routes to ship oil to Europe while emergency pipeline repair works are under way.
In a letter seen by Reuters, the Ukrainian mission to the EU proposed shipments through Ukraine’s oil transportation system or a maritime route, potentially including the Odesa-Brody pipeline linking Ukraine’s main Black Sea port to the EU.
Since October last year, Russia has intensified its drone and ​missile attacks on the Ukrainian ​energy system, knocking out electricity and heat and plunging millions of Ukrainians into long blackouts during bitterly cold winter temperatures.