Attorneys representing detainees at a makeshift immigration detention facility in the Florida Everglades held their first federal-court hearing Thursday on claims that detainees have been denied the right to meet privately with counsel, a lawsuit that comes as a separate court order requires the facility to wind down operations.
The hearing in Fort Myers addressed, among other issues, how a preliminary injunction in an unrelated environmental lawsuit requiring the facility’s operations to cease will affect the legal challenge over attorney access, which alleges violations of the First Amendment. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams last month issued the injunction ordering operations at the site to be wound down by the end of October, with detainees transferred to other facilities and equipment and fencing removed.
The facility, nicknamed "Alligator Alcatraz," was hastily built in late June on an isolated airstrip surrounded by wetlands by the administration of Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis. State officials said the site was established to support federal deportation efforts. The governor described the remote location as a deterrent to escape, likening it to the island prison in California known as Alcatraz.
The detainees' lawsuit contends that attorneys have been prevented from meeting privately with clients held at the site, a restriction the plaintiffs say infringes on constitutional and statutory rights. Thursday’s hearing focused on procedural and jurisdictional questions, including how the timeline and mandates set in the environmental injunction — which requires transfers and removal of infrastructure by the end of October — should be reconciled with the detainees’ claims and requests for relief.
Court papers and public comments during the hearing made clear the interplay between two parallel legal tracks: the environmental plaintiffs who sought to stop construction and operations on grounds related to wetlands and habitat protections, and civil-rights counsel advocating for access and conditions for people detained there. The environmental injunction followed expedited litigation in federal court that challenged the rapid construction and use of the site.
Federal and state officials moved quickly in late June to establish the detention site, citing a need to assist federal immigration enforcement. Lawyers for the detainees argue that the location and operating practices at the remote facility have impeded confidential attorney-client communications.
The Fort Myers hearing did not resolve those substantive claims, and court officials did not immediately announce any rulings. With the environmental injunction setting a firm wind-down deadline, further litigation is likely to center on relief that can be secured before transfers are completed, and on whether any ongoing or future detentions at the site will be subject to changed procedures.
The litigation represents a convergence of legal challenges that have surrounded the facility since its construction: environmental concerns about developing in sensitive wetlands and constitutional questions about the treatment and legal access of people held in a remote, rapidly erected detention complex. Additional hearings and filings are expected as the court navigates the overlapping orders and the timetable for relocating detainees and dismantling infrastructure.