Immigration Attorney explains how Florida's policies foster fear and uncertainty for residents
Over the last few months, Florida has become a battleground for anti-immigration policies, using fear-mongering tactics to justify severe legal measures.
The messages surrounding immigration law messaging have led to an atmosphere of suspicion and anxiety, not just among undocumented individuals but also among legal residents, businesses, and mixed-status families.
Many immigrants—documented and undocumented also—now live in fear of racial profiling, wrongful detainment, and family separations.
I think there is increased enforcement, but I don't think just because you're walking down the street, you're at risk of immigration detaining you or law enforcement stopping you,' said Frank Symphorien-Saavedra, Board-Certified Attorney and Expert in Immigration and Nationality Law.
The immigration laws have created an environment of uncertainty. Immigration legal experts stress that knowledge and preparation are the best defenses.
Residents, regardless of status should stay informed, seek legal counsel, and avoid making decisions out of fear.
This comes as the state has pushed to take matters into its own hands by expanding state-level enforcement and working closely with ICE.
In February, Governor Ron Desantis enacted immigration laws SB 2-C and SB 4-C, increasing stricter immigration impacts.
The future of immigration laws in Florida is uncertain but volatile. Several key factors will shape the landscape in the coming years.
1. Legal Challenges and Federal Pushback:
Like challenging SB 1718 in court, arguing that it violates constitutional rights and federal authority over immigration laws.
2. Economic Consequences May Force Change:
The state's agriculture, construction, and service industries could struggle to fill positions, forcing businesses and policymakers to reconsider policies if the state economy takes a hit.
3. Continued Fear and Displacement:
If policies remain harsh, the state could see a long-term decline in its immigrant workforce, further damaging industries that rely on them. Families may want to leave.
Regardless of immigration status, all Floridians should stay informed and proactive.
Symphorien-Saavedra emphasizes the importance of knowing your rights and taking proactive steps to ensure safety.
Know Your Legal Status – If you are a resident or undocumented, consult an immigration attorney to assess whether you qualify for any relief, such as asylum, DACA, or a green card.
Carry Proper Documentation – For legal residents, carrying proof of residency can prevent unnecessary detainment. Undocumented individuals should know their rights if stopped by law enforcement.
Understand the 'Show Me Your Papers' Mentality – SB 1718 does not allow local police to randomly demand proof of immigration status.
It does increase collaboration between local authorities and federal immigration enforcement. Knowing how to handle interactions with law enforcement is critical.
Avoid Self-Incrimination – If approached by law enforcement or immigration officers, do not volunteer information about your immigration status. Instead, request an attorney and exercise the right to remain silent.
Stay Informed and Not Afraid – Community organizations offer workshops, legal aid, and resources to help individuals understand the law.
Click here to download our free news, weather and smart TV apps. And click here to stream Channel 9 Eyewitness News live.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
L.A. immigration protests latest: California sues Trump admin. over National Guard deployment, president says he would support arresting Newsom
California is suing the Trump administration over its National Guard deployment in Los Angeles without the consent of the state's governor amid immigration protests that escalated over the weekend, leading to dozens of arrests. The Los Angeles Police Department has since declared all of downtown L.A. an unlawful assembly area. The lawsuit was filed Monday by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and accuses President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of "unlawfully" federalizing the state's National Guard, and infringing on California Gov. Gavin Newsom's authority as commander-in-chief of the state's military reserve force. "Every governor, red or blue, should reject this outrageous overreach," Bonta said. "It is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism. We will not let this stand.' Bonta also alleged in a televised statement Monday that protests escalated after National Guard troops arrived on Sunday. 'We'll never know what might have been had the president left our state and local authorities to continue the important work they were already doing and were more than capable of doing,' Bonta said. Before the lawsuit was announced, Trump on Monday said he would support his border czar arresting Newsom over possible obstructions to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions in the state amid protests. At least 44 people were arrested by federal ICE agents during a raid at several locations around Los Angeles on Friday, including Ambiance Apparel in the garment district and a Home Depot in the Westlake District. These areas are known to have significant migrant populations and labor-focused industries. Protests then erupted in Los Angeles in response to Trump's immigration crackdown that has seen federal agents arrest a student on his way to volleyball practice and erroneously deport a man to El Salvador. Sunday marked the third straight day of protests over the wave of immigration raids. Crowds gathered in downtown Los Angeles and Boyle Heights. Protesters marched from Boyle Heights to the Metropolitan Detention Center, a federal building in downtown L.A. This led to the LAPD declaring the area an unlawful assembly. Protesters moved from outside the federal building and walked onto the 101 Freeway around 3:30 p.m. local time. Police fired tear gas and other projectiles into the crowd and cleared the area by 5 p.m. Meanwhile, another protest started on Sunday outside of Los Angeles City Hall Protesters outside the city's prison in the Alameda neighborhood of L.A. were arrested, according to the LAPD. Around 300 National Guard troops arrived in Los Angeles County on Sunday after Trump deployed them to protect federal property and personnel, without the consent of Newsom, a Democrat with whom he often spars. As governor, Newsom would normally retain control and command over the California National Guard. The White House said the deployment was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in the state, and initially stated that 2,000 troops were being deployed. About 500 Marines are also prepared to deploy to the area, the Northern Command said. It's the first time in nearly 60 years that a president has called in the National Guard without a state's request or consent. The last time was when President Lyndon Johnson sent the Guard to protect a 1965 civil rights march in Alabama. Newsom said California is suing the Trump administration over the federal mobilization of the National Guard. Newsom told MSNBC that Trump's federal mobilization of the National Guard was 'an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act.' The governor also alleged that Trump is the one to blame for the escalation in California, saying, 'He's exacerbated the conditions. He's lit the proverbial match. He's putting fuel on this fire.' Tom Homan, Trump's border czar, told NBC News that anyone who obstructs immigration enforcement would be arrested. When asked if that would include Newsom or Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, he replied, 'I'll say it about anybody. … You cross that line, it's a felony to knowingly harbor and conceal an illegal alien. It's a felony to impede law enforcement doing their job.' Newsom responded to Homan's NBC interview on Sunday by saying: 'He knows where to find me.' Homan later clarified those remarks in an interview with Fox News. 'The reporter asked me, well, could Governor Newsom or Mayor Bass be arrested? I said, 'Well no one's above the law — if they cross the line and commit a crime, absolutely they can.'' He added: 'There was no discussion about arresting Newsom.' Meanwhile, Trump said he would support the arrest of Newsom. "I would do it if I were Tom. I think it's great. Gavin likes the publicity but I think it would be a great thing," Trump said Monday. In response, Newsom said: "This is a day I hoped I would never see in America." "I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation — this is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism," he wrote on X. The peaceful protests escalated into vandalism, autonomous cars set ablaze, fireworks and other objects thrown at law enforcement, police firing rubber bullets (including at an Australian journalist), and dozens of arrests by the LAPD. 'In recent days, many protests across the city have been peaceful and we thank the community for expressing their views and their frustration in a responsible manner,' LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell said in a Sunday news conference. 'However, when peaceful demonstrations devolve into acts of vandalism or violence, especially violence directed at innocent people, law enforcement officers and others, we must respond firmly.' McDonnell said that a total of 39 people had been arrested — 29 on Saturday and 10 on Sunday. He also said the LAPD was not given advance notice that federal operations would occur in the area. On Sunday, several Waymo driverless vehicles were vandalized and set on fire in downtown Los Angeles. A Waymo spokesperson told USA Today Monday morning that its autonomous vehicles have been removed from the area and the company has temporarily suspended its ride-hailing service 'out of an abundance of caution.' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass told CNN on Monday that the situation has since calmed in the city. 'If you dial back time and go to Friday, if immigration raids had not happened here, we would not have had the disorder that went on last night,' Bass said. 'We do not know where and when the next raids will be. That is the concern because people in this city have a rapid response network.' 'If they see ICE, they go out and they protest, and so it's just a recipe for pandemonium that is completely unnecessary,' she added.
Los Angeles Times
38 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Federalizing the state National Guard is a chilling push past the law
The use of the military to quell protests is something associated with dictators in foreign countries, and as of Saturday night, with a president of the United States. When President Trump federalized 2,000 members of the California National Guard, deploying them because of protests against federal immigration authorities, he sent a chilling signal about his willingness to use the military against demonstrators. There are two relevant aspects of federal law: One allows the president to federalize a state's National Guard and the other permits the president to use the military in domestic situations. Neither, at this point, provides legal authority for Saturday's action. As for the former, a federal statute, 10 U.S.C. section 12406, authorizes the president to take over a state's National Guard if 'the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation; there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.' This is the statutory provision Trump has invoked. But it is highly questionable that the protests against ICE agents rise to the level of a 'rebellion against the authority of the Government.' This statute does not give the president the authority to use the troops. Another law, the Posse Comitatus Act, generally prohibits the military from being used within the United States. The 2,000 National Guard troops are only deployed to protect ICE officers. However, even this is legally questionable unless the president invokes the Insurrection Act of 1807, which creates a basis for using the military in domestic situations and an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act. On Sunday, Trump said he was considering invoking the Insurrection Act. The Insurrection Act allows a president to deploy troops domestically in three situations. One is if a governor or state legislature asks for the deployment to put down an insurrection. The last time this occurred was in 1992, when California Gov. Pete Wilson asked President George H.W. Bush to use the National Guard to stop the riots that occurred after police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King. With Gov. Gavin Newsom opposing the federalizing of the National Guard, this isn't the case in Los Angeles today. A second part of the Insurrection Act allows deployment in order to 'enforce the laws' of the United States or to 'suppress rebellion' whenever 'unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion' make it 'impracticable' to enforce federal law by the 'ordinary course of judicial proceedings.' Since no one disputes the courts are fully functioning, this provision has no relevance. It is the third part of the Insurrection Act that is more likely to be cited by the Trump administration. It allows the president to use military troops in a state to suppress 'any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy' that 'so hinders the execution of the laws' that any portion of the state's inhabitants are deprived of a constitutional right and state authorities are unable or unwilling to protect that right. President Eisenhower used this power to send federal troops to help desegregate the Little Rock, Ark., public schools when the governor defied federal court orders. This section of the law has additional language: The president may deploy troops in a state that 'opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.' This broad language is what I would expect Trump to invoke to use the troops directly against the anti-ICE protests. The Insurrection Act does not define crucial terms such as 'insurrection,' 'rebellion' or 'domestic violence.' In 1827, in Martin vs. Mott, the Supreme Court said that 'the authority to decide whether [an exigency requiring the militia to be called out] has arisen belongs exclusively to the President, and ... his decision is conclusive upon all other persons.' There have been many calls over the years to modify the expansive language of the Insurrection Act. But since presidents have rarely used it, and not in a very long time, reform efforts seemed unnecessary. The broad presidential authority under the Insurrection Act thus has remained on the books as a loaded weapon. There is a strong set of norms that has restrained presidents from using federal troops in domestic situations, especially absent a request from a state governor. But Trump shows no respect for norms. Any use of the military in domestic situations should be regarded as a last resort in the United States. The readiness of the administration to quickly invoke any aspect of this authority is frightening, a message about the willingness of a remade federal government to quell demonstrations. The protests in Los Angeles do not rise to the conditions that warrant the federalization of the National Guard. This is not to deny that some of the anti-ICE protests have turned violent. However, they have been limited in size and there is no reason to believe that law enforcement could not control them absent military force. But the statutes Trump can invoke give presidents broad powers. In the context of everything that we have seen from the Trump administration, nationalizing the California National Guard should make us even more afraid. Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, is an Opinion Voices contributing writer.
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump vs. California is the fight the White House wants
President Trump is getting the fight with California he wants as Democrats in the state criticize his decision to send the National Guard to Los Angeles without local approval to deal with protests surrounding raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The unfolding events hit at the heart of key issues that Trump basks in: immigration and fighting liberal California Democrats. You can also add in law and order, as Trump and his team accuse California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and other local officials of being too soft on demonstrators destroying property and setting cars on fire. White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller on Sunday reposted several images meant to convey the chaos in LA, including one showing huge plumes of smoke billowing from a burning vehicle as demonstrators watched, with one with holding Mexican flag. The post read, 'Let's check in on how LAPD's management of the 'protests' is going,' and criticized Newsom's slamming of Trump's decision to send the guard. A second Miller repost was from his White House colleague Taylor Budowich, who sent out a similar video of a masked protestor on a car surrounded by other burning cars and demonstrators in the streets. 'Democrat management,' the post said. Newsom has said California will sue the Trump administration over its deployment of the National Guard, while the White House maintains Trump intervened at the right time to restore law and order and that the violent attacks had already escalated before he stepped in. 'Donald Trump has created the conditions you see on your TV tonight. He's exacerbated the conditions. He's, you know, lit the proverbial match. He's putting fuel on this fire, ever since he announced he was taking over the National Guard — an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act,' Newsom said on MSNBC. Just a few days ago, Trump was battling negative coverage of his public feud with erstwhile ally Elon Musk. The violence in LA allowed him to rapidly shift gears and put much of the focus on immigration even as his team pushed Congress to pass his signature legislation — which had triggered the battle with Musk. 'The riots in Los Angeles prove that we desperately need more immigration enforcement personnel and resources. America must reverse the invasion unleashed by Joe Biden of millions of unvetted illegal aliens into our country,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on the social platform X, calling for Senate passage of the House-passed 'one, big beautiful bill' with its funding measures for border security. The story even served to bring Musk back into the fold, with the tech mogul sending a number of supportive messages of the president that criticized Newsom and demonstrators. Trump ran on a platform of mass deportations. Since then, ICE raids, arrests of migrants at immigration courts and lawsuits over deportations have been a major part of his first few months in office. His administration has blamed Democrats, especially Biden, for allowing what they call an 'invasion' of migrants coming in at the nation's southern border, and White House briefings have often begun with spotlighting a deported migrant who committed a crime in the U.S. The images of masked demonstrators with Mexican flags falls right into this argument. That the protests are in California is also good for Trump. Trump has flirted with the idea of fining or nixing federal funding for the state, lashing out earlier this month after a transgender athlete was allowed to compete and win at a high school track and field meet. He also blamed Newsom, who is widely considered to be eying a presidential bid, for the wildfires that raged in the Los Angeles area in January and made his first trip as president to California to meet with him and survey damage. Newsom then visited Trump at the White House in February about aid for wildfire victims. The White House is now blaming Newsom for the protests in Los Angeles, bashing him for suing the administration instead of focusing on solutions. 'Gavin Newsom's feckless leadership is directly responsible for the lawless riots and violent attacks on law enforcement in Los Angeles. Instead of filing baseless lawsuits meant to score political points with his left-wing base, Newsom should focus on protecting Americans by restoring law and order to his state,' White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said. Trump on Sunday didn't rule out using the Insurrection Act, which allows the president to deploy the military and federalize the National Guard in the event of an insurrection. He considered invoking the law in his first term during the 2020 protests over police brutality, but officials like former Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back at the time. 'We're going to have troops everywhere. We're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart like it was under Biden and his auto pen,' Trump said Sunday. The president also said that if California officials stand in the way of federal officials deporting migrants, they will face federal charges. 'We're just going to see what happens. If we think there's a serious insurrection … we're going to have law and order,' he said. California Democrats are responding to Trump by calling on residents to not turn to violence while protesting, arguing that the president's move to bring in the National Guard was meant to provoke the chaos. 'Angelenos — don't engage in violence and chaos. Don't give the administration what they want,' Mayor Karen Bass said on X. Similarly, Newsom warned other states about Trump federalizing the National Guard and accused him of escalating the situation. 'This is exactly what Donald Trump wanted,' Newsom said on X. 'He flamed the fires and illegally acted to federalize the National Guard. The order he signed doesn't just apply to CA. It will allow him to go into ANY STATE and do the same thing. We're suing him.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
