State Judge Poised to Consider Migrant Flights Case
The case focuses primarily on $12 million that lawmakers included in the state budget for the Department of Transportation to carry out a "program to facilitate the transport of unauthorized aliens from this state."
January 10, 2023 at 12:57 PM
4 minute read
A Leon County circuit judge will hear arguments Friday about whether he should toss out a lawsuit filed by a South Florida state senator after Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration flew about 50 migrants from Texas to Massachusetts in September.
Sen. Jason Pizzo, D-North Miami Beach, contends in the lawsuit that part of the state budget used to pay for the flights violates the Florida Constitution and that the DeSantis administration improperly infringed on the federal government's authority over immigration issues.
But attorneys for DeSantis, the Florida Department of Transportation and state Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis filed motions last week to dismiss the case. Circuit Judge John Cooper, who rejected an earlier version of the lawsuit in November, is slated to hold a hearing Friday on a revised complaint.
The case focuses primarily on $12 million that lawmakers included in the state budget for the Department of Transportation to carry out a "program to facilitate the transport of unauthorized aliens from this state."
The DeSantis administration contracted with Vertol Systems Company Inc. to transport two planeloads of migrants on Sept. 14 from San Antonio, Texas, to Martha's Vineyard, with a stop in the Northwest Florida community of Crestview.
The Department of Transportation paid $615,000 to Vertol for the flights. Also, three additional Vertol purchase orders of $950,000 each are listed on a state contracting website for "relocation services."
The flights spurred a national controversy and came as DeSantis, widely considered a possible 2024 Republican presidential candidate, often criticizes federal immigration policies.
Pizzo's lawsuit argues, in part, that the section of the budget violates the Florida Constitution because it revised such things as procurement standards and created a new program. It said such changes would need to be made in substantive laws — rather than through the annual budget.
The lawsuit said it is seeking a declaration that the section of the budget is unconstitutional and an injunction "preventing defendants from continuing to spend monies unconstitutionally appropriated and to recoup monies already spent pursuant to the unconstitutional provision."
Also, the lawsuit contends that the state violated what is known as the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution because the federal government has authority over immigration issues.
The lawsuit said that under the U.S. Constitution, "Congress is vested with exclusive power over immigration and naturalization. Under that and other constitutional and statutory authority, the federal government has exclusive authority to enact and enforce regulations concerning which immigrants to admit, exclude, remove or allow to remain in the United States."
But in a motion to dismiss the case filed last week, attorneys for DeSantis and the Department of Transportation argued that Pizzo does not have legal standing to pursue the lawsuit. The motion said, in part, that Pizzo had not "alleged that he suffered any special injury."
Also, the motion disputed Pizzo's constitutional arguments. As an example, the state's attorneys refuted the argument that the budget was used to improperly create a new program. The motion said the budget is frequently used to create programs, including at least five in the current spending plan.
"Prior appropriations have included similar language, which appears not to have engendered constitutional controversy," the motion said.
Also, the DeSantis administration disputed violating federal authority on immigration issues.
"It [the section of the budget] does not regulate the flow of aliens into or out of the United States or determine anybody's citizenship status; rather it makes funds available to facilitate the transport of consenting unauthorized aliens from Florida to other states," the motion said.
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250