logo
Immigration rights groups, ACLU lawsuit alleges Alligator Alcatraz preventing detainees from having attorney access

Immigration rights groups, ACLU lawsuit alleges Alligator Alcatraz preventing detainees from having attorney access

CBS News6 days ago
A class-action lawsuit filed Wednesday alleges that people held at the immigrant-detention center dubbed "Alligator Alcatraz" are being prevented from having access to lawyers and "effectively have no way to contest their detention."
"No protocols exist at this facility for providing standard means of confidential attorney-client communication, such as in-person attorney visitation and phone or video calls that are available at any other detention facility, jail or prison," the lawsuit, filed in the federal Southern District of Florida, said. "The only way that detained people can communicate with the outside world is via infrequent access to collect pay phone calls that are monitored and recorded, and last approximately five minutes."
The lawsuit also alleges that lawyers have been barred from entering the facility in the Everglades and that officials have "made it virtually impossible for detainees, or their counsel, to file documents required to contest their detention with the immigration court."
"No instruction exists as to which immigration courts have been designated for submission of motions for bond redetermination for people detained at Alligator Alcatraz," the lawsuit, filed by attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans for Immigrant Justice, said. "As a result, detainees held at Alligator Alcatraz effectively have no way to contest their detention."
The ACLU announced the lawsuit Wednesday evening.
The lawsuit names as plaintiffs four men who are detained at the facility, three law firms, a legal services organization and an attorney. It names as defendants federal and state officials and agencies, including U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Gov. Ron DeSantis.
The lawsuit, which alleges First Amendment and due-process violations, was the latest move in the controversy over the detention facility that the state built in recent weeks at the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport, a remote site used for flight training and surrounded by the Everglades and the Big Cypress National Preserve.
DeSantis and other state and federal officials have touted the facility as helping carry out President Donald Trump's mass deportation efforts for people who are in the country illegally. The project has drawn national attention, with the state Republican Party even selling Alligator Alcatraz merchandise.
But opponents have blasted conditions at the facility and argued it will harm the Everglades and the national preserve. Environmental groups last month filed a separate lawsuit that alleges violations of the National Environmental Policy Act, a federal law that requires evaluating potential environmental impacts before such a project can move forward.
State officials have said the federal government will reimburse Florida for costs related to the Everglades facility. They also announced last month plans to build a second detention facility at North Florida's Camp Blanding, a training site for the Florida National Guard.
DeSantis indicated Wednesday that plans for the Camp Blanding facility would move forward "once there's a demand" for bed space and more detainees are housed at the Everglades site.
"Once there's a demand, then we would be able to go for Camp Blanding. But what I don't want to do is set up Blanding if one is 60 percent full and then the other is 40 percent. I'd rather just channel everyone to Alligator (Alcatraz), since it's easier," DeSantis told reporters at an event in Tampa.
DeSantis said the Everglades facility can "easily" house 3,000 to 4,000 detainees.
"We have not … received that many illegal aliens there yet, but it has grown pretty quickly," the governor said.
Camp Blanding could house fewer detainees and become active "in a week or two," if needed, according to DeSantis.
"I don't want to be creating some structure that can hold 2,000 illegals and then we end up having, like,150 there after a week. And I don't think that's the trend," he said.
DeSantis administration officials did not respond Wednesday to a request for information about the number of detainees being held at the South Florida center.
Friends of the Everglades and the Center for Biological Diversity on June 27 filed the lawsuit about potential environmental impacts. The Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida this week filed a motion seeking to join the case.
DeSantis has disputed that the facility threatens the environment, pointing, in part, to the decades-old airport at the site.
Also on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Jose Martinez recused himself from the environmental groups' lawsuit, which was reassigned to U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams. As is typical in such instances, Martinez did not give a reason for stepping aside.
Williams recently drew headlines when she held Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier in civil contempt in a lawsuit stemming from a law passed during a February special legislative session that created state crimes for undocumented immigrants who enter or re-enter Florida.
Williams in April blocked enforcement of the law, ruling that it likely was preempted by federal immigration-enforcement authority. The contempt ruling stemmed from a letter the Uthmeier sent to law enforcement agencies after she blocked the law.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Second court blocks Trump's birthright citizenship order nationwide after Supreme Court ruling
Second court blocks Trump's birthright citizenship order nationwide after Supreme Court ruling

The Hill

time16 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Second court blocks Trump's birthright citizenship order nationwide after Supreme Court ruling

A second court ruled that President Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship still cannot go into effect anywhere in the country following the Supreme Court's recent decision that claws back nationwide injunctions. The 9 th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 on Wednesday that four Democratic-led states were entitled to a nationwide injunction, because any narrower block would fail to provide them complete relief. 'States' residents may give birth in a non-party state, and individuals subject to the Executive Order from non-party states will inevitably move to the States,' wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Ronald Gould. Gould's decision was joined by U.S. Circuit Judge Michael Hawkins, both appointed by former President Clinton. U.S. Circuit Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, dissented, saying the states had no legal right to bring the case. 'Courts must be vigilant in enforcing the limits of our jurisdiction and our power to order relief,' Bumatay wrote. 'Otherwise, we risk entangling ourselves in contentious issues not properly before us and overstepping our bounds,' he continued. 'No matter how significant the question or how high the stakes of the case—at all times, we must adhere to the confines of 'the judicial Power.'' The ruling comes after the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision late last month, curtailed the ability of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions that go beyond the parties suing to block the president's policies for anyone in the country. But the high court preserved pathways for plaintiffs to still receive nationwide relief in certain circumstances. Individuals can file class-action lawsuits, and states may still receive a universal injunction if it is needed to afford them complete relief, the justices noted. Plaintiffs have since pursued both pathways to block Trump's order, which would deny citizenship to anyone born in the country if they don't have at least one parent with permanent legal status. Every court to opine on the legality of it so far has found it to be unconstitutional. Wednesday's ruling is the second time Trump's order has been blocked nationwide following the Supreme Court's decision. A federal judge in New Hampshire agreed to the American Civil Liberties Union's request to certify a nationwide class of unborn babies and indefinitely block the administration from enforcing Trump's birthright citizenship order against them. The 9 th Circuit heard a case brought by Democratic attorneys general in Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon. The panel majority said Wednesday that only blocking Trump's order in some parts of the country would continue to burden the four states. 'To account for this, the States would need to overhaul their eligibility-verification systems for Medicaid, CHIP, and Title IV-E. For that reason, the States would suffer the same irreparable harms under a geographically-limited injunction as they would without an injunction,' Gould wrote.

French President Macron, wife sue podcaster over claims first lady born a man
French President Macron, wife sue podcaster over claims first lady born a man

UPI

time2 hours ago

  • UPI

French President Macron, wife sue podcaster over claims first lady born a man

French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte (L), greet King Frederik X and Queen Mary of Denmark at the Elysee Palace in Paris on March 31. File Photo by Maya Vidon-White/UPI | License Photo July 23 (UPI) -- French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte, on Wednesday filed a defamation suit in the United States against right-wing podcast host Candace Owens, who claims the first lady was born a man. The 22-count complaint, which was filed in Delaware Superior Court, seeks unspecified damages. The 219-page lawsuit also named her company, Candace Owens LLC, and the operator of her website, GeorgeTom, Inc. During an eight-part series, called "Becoming Brigitte," she alleged Brigitt Macron had assumed another person's identity and transitioned to a woman. Emmanuel Macron is 47 and his wife is 72. "These claims are demonstrably false, and Owens knew they were false when she published them," the lawsuit said. "Yet, she published them anyway. And the reason is clear: it is not the pursuit of truth, but the pursuit of fame." The lawsuit said a retraction was sought three times, including a final one on July 1. The lawsuit said she continued to push "outlandish, defamatory, and far-fetched fictions" against the couple. "Ms. Owens' campaign of defamation was plainly designed to harass and cause pain to us and our families and to garner attention and notoriety," they said. "We gave her every opportunity to back away from these claims, but she refused. It is our earnest hope that this lawsuit will set the record straight and end this campaign of defamation once and for all." A spokesperson for Owens said to CBS and CNBC: "Candace Owens is not shutting up. This is a foreign government attacking the First Amendment rights of an American independent journalist. Candace repeatedly requested an interview with Brigitte Macron. "Instead of offering a comment, Brigitte is resorting to trying to bully a reporter into submission. In France, politicians can bully journalists, but this is not France. It's America." Owens also responded to the suit live on YouTube, calling it public relations strategy. "This is why you're here," she said. "This is how I feel right now. My receiving my papers today." She has 4.48 million subscribers on her YouTube channel. The Macrons have been married since 2007, 10 years before he became president. "People end up believing them, and it disrupts your life, even in your most private moments," Macron said at an event in Paris in 2024. Owens began making the allegations in March 2024 when she was working for The Daily Wire, a conservative media outlet, after the rumors first surfaced in 2021. After she was terminated by The Daily Wire, she launched her podcast in June 2024. In December, the Marons sent their first retraction demand. Then, she launched the podcast series. On July 2, she published a letter from the Macrons' attorney Clare Locke to her lawyer demanding the retraction. "If ever there was a clear-cut case of defamation, this is it," attorney Tom Clare told CNBC. In 2022, Brigitte Macron sued two French women for spreading similar claims. Macrons won the original case but this year the women were victories on appeal with the lawsuit going to a higher court. Owens said in June that she was wrong to campaign for Donald Trump in the 2024 election after the U.S. became involved in the Israel-Iran conflict. "He's been a chronic disappointment," Owens said during an appearance on Piers Morgan Uncensored. "And I feel embarrassed that I told people to go vote for him because this wasn't going to happen, and it is happening."

California Republicans have a warning for Trump on ICE raids: ‘The fear in our communities is real.'
California Republicans have a warning for Trump on ICE raids: ‘The fear in our communities is real.'

Politico

time2 hours ago

  • Politico

California Republicans have a warning for Trump on ICE raids: ‘The fear in our communities is real.'

At the same time, Republicans who distance themselves from Trump risk inflaming their base voters, who are still ardently supportive of strict enforcement. 'Whether you're Valadao or Young Kim or anyone else, understand that the politics of trying to embrace the center necessarily means that you may alienate the right,' Fleischman said. Valadao, who represents an important agricultural region, weighed in on the issue in a social media post last month. 'I remain concerned about ongoing ICE operations throughout CA and will continue my conversations with the administration—urging them to prioritize the removal of known criminals over the hardworking people who have lived peacefully in the Valley for years,' he said on X. But he has kept a low profile on the issue ever since. His office said he was not available for an interview. Kim's spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment. 'Republicans have real concerns about potential economic impacts, especially upon agriculture, with the way that enforcement is being conducted,' said Rob Stutzman, a Sacramento-based GOP strategist who advises political and corporate clients. Republican dissent is largely limited to criticism of the ICE raids — which have resulted in the arrests of hundreds of people who have no convictions or pending charges despite the administration's portrayal of the operation as targeted at serious criminals — and not of the president. GOP officials are also quick to accuse Democrats and former President Joe Biden of not doing enough to stop illegal immigration. They blame the media and activists for spreading fear about the sweeps. Still, even the muted public criticism, combined with the recent polls showing that public concern about immigration is receding , suggest the winds may be shifting on a signature element of Trump's policy agenda. 'There's going to be Republicans hedging on this for sure,' Mike Madrid, a Republican political strategist and author of 'The Latino Century,' said after the release of a Gallup Poll that showed a majority of Americans now disapprove of Trump's handling of immigration. 'It's coming, and it has to. The numbers are just unbelievable.' In California, Trump started to make good on his oft-promised mass deportations in June. U.S. authorities had carried out immigration operations in the past, of course, but not at this scale, described as a 'siege' in a lawsuit filed by a coalition of activists, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the United Farm Workers, and joined by the city of Los Angeles.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store