\u201cSeems like a lot rides on the meaning of the word inspect,\u201d U.S. Circuit Judge Kevin Newsom said during oral arguments.<\/p>\n
At issue before the 11th Circuit was Florida\u2019s interpretation of the term and whether its enforcement interferes with the federal government\u2019s authority over immigration.<\/p>\n
Florida Chief Deputy Solicitor General Nathan Forrester suggested certifying the question to the state supreme court, but the judges expressed hesitancy to do so.<\/p>\n
U.S. Circuit judges Nancy Abudu and Embry Kidd, both Joe Biden appointees, questioned whether the law is preempted by federal immigration statutes, noting Congress already criminalizes assisting unlawful entry and provides extensive procedures for removal.<\/p>\n
\u201cEven if there are these unknown individuals, do you disagree that there is still government efforts to inspect those individuals? How does Florida not impinge the federal government\u2019s ability to do that?\u201d Judge Kidd asked.<\/p>\n
In its appellate brief, Florida says its law mirrors federal inspection procedures, under which a person who is not \u201cclearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted\u201d undergoes a more \u201cdetailed inspection\u201d or is placed in removal proceedings.<\/p>\n
Florida acknowledges the law does not hinge on whether a person is lawfully present. Instead, it argues, the law depends on whether the federal government is aware of that person\u2019s presence in the country.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou don\u2019t know their status and if you don\u2019t know their status, isn\u2019t it the federal government\u2019s domain to determine that?\u201d Abudu questioned.<\/p>\n
Forrester said the government\u2019s interest should not preclude states\u2019 efforts to do the same.<\/p>\n
The Farmworker Association of Florida and individual plaintiffs argued the statute is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, questioning whether someone who has never had contact with federal authorities can be considered to have been \u201cinspected by the federal government.\u201d<\/p>\n
The nonprofit, grassroots farmworker organization has nearly 12,000 members, including immigrants with a range of immigration statuses.<\/p>\n
Some members transport fellow farmworkers into Florida for seasonal planting and harvesting work and fear they could face felony charges.<\/p>\n
They argue that the 11th Circuit and other courts have already held that states cannot regulate the transport of immigrants, because Congress has assumed that role and governs unlawful transport.<\/p>\n
A lower court paused the law from going into effect in response to their federal\u00a0lawsuit<\/a>.<\/p>\n The judge correctly rejected the idea that states could \u201ccircumvent field or conflict preemption by marginally expanding a regulation to cover a small, additional category\u201d outside the preempted field, the plaintiffs wrote in their brief.<\/p>\n Florida argued the law falls outside the scope of federal immigration law because it applies not only to immigrants but also to U.S. citizens who illegally reenter the country.<\/p>\n Newsom, a Donald Trump appointee, said he agreed the challengers\u2019 reading may interpret the statute too broadly. But he questioned how Florida could enforce the law without encroaching on the federal government\u2019s authority over immigration.<\/p>\n