Following a state of emergency declaration in 2023, Florida officials commandeered an airport in the Big Cypress National Preserve to construct a temporary immigration detention facility. The facility was built using state funds and state law enforcement officers, though federal immigration officials later inspected it for compliance and began transporting detainees there under section 287(g) agreements. Environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe sued, arguing that the construction and operation of the facility violated the National Environmental Policy Act by failing to conduct an environmental impact statement. The district court granted a preliminary injunction, halting construction and limiting detainee populations, but the Eleventh Circuit reviewed whether the federal government's involvement was sufficient to make the project a federal action subject to NEPA.
Chief Judge Pryor, writing for the majority, explained that the National Environmental Policy Act applies only to major federal actions significantly affecting the human environment. The court analyzed whether the facility qualified as a federal action under the Administrative Procedure Act and NEPA. First, the court found no final agency action because the decision to construct the facility was made by Florida officials using state resources. The court noted that an agency's failure to prepare an environmental impact statement, by itself, is not final agency action absent identifiable substantive federal action. Second, regarding NEPA, the court applied 2023 amendments that exclude non-federal actions unless there is both substantial federal funding and substantial federal control. The court found that Florida retained final authority over the project's size, construction, and operation, meaning there was no substantial federal control. The court rejected the argument that federal standards or 287(g) agreements transformed the state project into a federal one, stating that states may choose to assist federal law enforcement without losing their sovereign control over the project. Additionally, the court held that the district court's injunction violated the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which strips courts of authority to enjoin the operation of immigration enforcement statutes, as the injunction prevented the Secretary from detaining aliens at a facility of his choosing.
The preliminary injunction is vacated, and the case is remanded to the district court. The environmental claims under NEPA are effectively dismissed because the court found no federal action to review. However, the court left open the possibility for plaintiffs to pursue separate challenges to immigration enforcement statutes. The district court is also instructed to address the issue of venue on remand, as the record was insufficient to support the initial ruling on venue.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download