On Sept. 4, 2025, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit granted a stay against a Miami federal judge’s order that would have barred new detainees and required large parts of the Everglades detention center known as “Alligator Alcatraz” to be dismantled within 60 days, allowing the facility to continue operating while the legal fight proceeds.
Key Takeaways
- The 11th Circuit paused a district court ruling that would have stopped new detainees from being sent to the Everglades facility.
- The appeals panel concluded the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review did not apply because the state funded and operated the site to date.
- The decision was 2–1; Judges Barbara Lagoa and Elizabeth L. Branch formed the majority, with Judge Adalberto Jordan dissenting.
- About 120–125 detainees remained at the center at the time of the appeals hearing.
- Florida has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the center; the panel noted dismantling and potential rebuilding costs of $15–20 million each.
- Environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe had challenged the facility for proceeding without NEPA review.
- Governor Ron DeSantis said the center is “open for business” and the state plans additional facilities in other parts of Florida.
Verified Facts
The appeals court ruling came on Sept. 4, 2025, when a three-judge panel in Atlanta granted a stay of the Aug. 21 decision by U.S. District Judge Kathleen M. Williams in Miami. Judge Williams had found that the Everglades facility required environmental review under NEPA because of its potential impacts on a fragile ecosystem.
The 11th Circuit majority held that NEPA did not apply because the detention center had been entirely funded and operated by the State of Florida so far; the panel said that even if federal reimbursement later occurred, that would not automatically convert the project into a federal undertaking subject to NEPA review.
At a separate hearing in Fort Myers, government lawyers reported that between 120 and 125 immigrants remained at the center. State counsel said Florida was not actively bringing more detainees while the litigation continued but intended to resume transfers if the district court ruling were reversed.
| Party | Position |
|---|---|
| 11th Circuit (Lagoa, Branch) | Granted stay |
| 11th Circuit (Jordan) | Dissent |
| District Court (Judge Williams) | Ordered halt and partial dismantling |
Environmental plaintiffs included the Center for Biological Diversity and the Miccosukee Tribe, which argued the site’s location in the Everglades posed significant ecological risks and required a federal environmental review prior to construction and operation.
Context & Impact
The case raises a legal question about when state-built projects become federal actions for purposes of environmental law, an issue with implications for other states contemplating state-run arrangements to house federal immigration detainees.
Florida’s decision to build and operate the Everglades center marked a notable expansion of state-level involvement in immigration detention, an area typically administered by the federal government. Several other states have since signaled interest in hosting federal detainees in state facilities.
- Fiscal angle: Florida has invested “hundreds of millions” in the site; the appeals panel highlighted potential removal and rebuilding costs of $15–20 million each.
- Operational angle: The ruling allows the state to keep the facility active and to resume transfers pending final appeal outcomes, raising questions about future detainee numbers and oversight.
“Alligator Alcatraz is, in fact, like we’ve always said, open for business,”
Governor Ron DeSantis
“This is a heartbreaking blow to America’s Everglades and every living creature there, but the fight isn’t even close to over,”
Elise Bennett, Center for Biological Diversity
Unconfirmed
- Whether the federal government will reimburse Florida for the hundreds of millions the state has spent remains unconfirmed.
- Plans for additional centers — the proposed second site west of Jacksonville and a possible third in the Panhandle — lack full public details on timelines and budgets.
- Future detainee counts and transfer schedules are uncertain and depend on subsequent court rulings or policy changes.
Bottom Line
The 11th Circuit’s stay keeps the Everglades detention center operational while the legal dispute over environmental review continues. The ruling narrows the immediate legal leverage environmental groups obtained at the district court level, but key questions — about federal reimbursement, broader state efforts to house federal detainees, and the environmental consequences for the Everglades — remain unresolved and are likely to return to the courts.