Federal Court Poised to Let ICE's "Alligator Alcatraz" Detention Center Operate Without Environmental Review

The federal government is likely to win its fight to keep one of ICE's most notorious detention facilities operating -- a makeshift holding center in Florida that critics have dubbed "Alligator Alcatraz" -- despite never conducting the environmental review required for major federal projects.

During oral arguments Tuesday before the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, a three-judge panel heavily scrutinized environmental groups' claims that the facility should be subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act. Chief Judge William H. Pryor suggested the lack of direct federal control over the site means "their federal case is over."

The facility was built by the state of Florida on an airport training site commandeered from Miami-Dade County specifically to assist ICE with immigration detention. A federal judge in south Florida ordered the center shut down last year, ruling it likely posed environmental harm and rejecting government claims that the site was a state project exempt from federal oversight. That order was put on hold pending appeal, and the detention center has remained open.

A Shell Game With Federal Funding

The crux of the case hinges on how much control the federal government actually exercises over the facility -- and who is footing the bill. Congress narrowed NEPA's scope in the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act to exclude projects "with no or minimal federal funding," and attorneys from the Justice Department and Florida's Department of Emergency Management argued that no "formal commitment" from ICE exists to reimburse construction and operating costs.

Judge Nancy Abudu wasn't buying it. She pointed to public statements from President Trump and former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem promising "the feds will cover this."

"The district court went through all of the testimony during the hearing as to the commitment from the federal government to fund this program," Abudu said. "Is it just that once Florida gets the check that we now have a federal action?"

Justice Department attorney Adam Gustafson insisted such statements don't change the project's legal status, arguing that "final agency action is not dictated by press conferences, Facebook posts."

Who Controls the Facility?

The judges repeatedly pressed both sides on how much authority Florida actually handed over under a program called 287(g), which allows ICE to delegate immigration arrest powers to states. Chief Judge Pryor asked whether Florida could repurpose the facility as a hurricane relief center tomorrow if it wanted to. Judge Abudu asked bluntly: "Who do the people belong to" inside the detention center?

Judge Andrew L. Brasher suggested Florida built the facility "on their own," and that under a different presidential administration, the state's right to do so would remain exempt from NEPA.

Paul Schwiep, the environmental plaintiffs' attorney from Coffey Burlington LP, countered that the federal government "does not have to be the primary actor" in a development to trigger NEPA review requirements. The facility was built "to serve an exclusively federal function" under immigration and deportation law, he argued.

What This Means for Other States

How the Eleventh Circuit rules could set a precedent for other Republican-led states that have agreed to build ICE detention centers. If the court finds that state-constructed facilities operating under federal immigration authority are exempt from environmental review, it could allow rapid expansion of the detention system without formal studies on impacts to protected wildlife, water systems, or surrounding communities.

The original injunction blocking further operation of Alligator Alcatraz now seems likely to be overturned, and the environmental groups' NEPA claims possibly dismissed entirely.

Environmental groups in the case are represented by Earthjustice. Florida is represented by the state Attorney General's office and Boies Schiller Flexner LLP.

The case is Friends of the Everglades v. Secretary of the US Department of Homeland Security, 11th Cir., No. 25-12873.