‘Alligator Alcatraz’ Ruling Opens Environmental Review Loophole

Florida’s role in building the detention facility known as “Alligator Alcatraz” let the federal government skip environmental review under a recent appeals court opinion, setting a dangerous precedent for other projects moving forward, environmental litigators say.

On April 21, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled the state’s agreement with the US Department of Homeland Security to build, then hand over operations of a makeshift detention center in the Florida Everglades wasn’t enough to trigger National Environmental Policy Act requirements, as the construction wasn’t “federally controlled.”

The opinion reversed a lower court’s ruling based on a four-day hearing including over 100 exhibits that found DHS explicitly asked the state to build the facility and promised financial reimbursement.

“The majority appears comfortable allowing federal and state officials to manipulate the formal descriptions of federal initiatives in ways that allow federal agencies to disclaim any legal responsibility under NEPA for actions that are unmistakably federal,” said Robert Glicksman, a professor of environmental law at the George Washington University School of Law.

The opinion comes as DHS increasingly relies on states using their own funds and agencies to help carry out the White House’s campaign to increase immigration deportations.

Florida is one of several GOP-led jurisdictions that have signed agreements under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The agreement allows ICE to hand over immigration arrest authority to state and local authorities, and Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) has promised more detention camps after Alligator Alcatraz.

Shi-Ling Hsu, the D’Alemberte Professor of Law at the Florida State University College of Law, said the Florida legislature, even hard-line Republican members, “do have their limits when it comes to threats to tourism.”

The current detention center sits within the Big Cypress National Preserve, and Hsu said the environmental challenge questions the limits of what developers can do in this “amorphous category of protected federal land.”

More NEPA Limits

Litigators say this is the first circuit court to rule on amendments Congress added to NEPA under the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act, which narrowed the scope of what projects qualify for review.

The law clarified impact studies only apply if a development is a “major federal action,” subject to “substantial federal control,” or relies on federal funding.

Here, the Eleventh Circuit reined in the scope even further to projects where the federal government relies on states to commandeer the land and lead construction. Judge William Pryor interpreted the FRA to mean state construction of a facility may convert to a federal action “only when both federal funding and federal control are present.”

This reading allows the federal government a “clear and convenient way to get around triggering NEPA, at least at the preliminary injunction phase,” said Deborah Sivas, a professor of environmental law at Stanford Law School.

The federal government evades publishing a final agency decision that courts can block, as Pryor’s opinion says plaintiffs can only challenge the construction, not the private agreement between the state and DHS, she said.

Judge Nancy Abudu wrote a strong dissent against the majority, going so far to say the majority “is just plain wrong” about the nature of Alligator Alcatraz.

“The majority has rendered the people actually detained in the facility and Florida’s cherished environment protected by no one, and vulnerable to the whims of anyone,” she said.

State of Play

While environmental groups failed to sustain a court block against the construction of Alligator Alcatraz, groups will have a second chance to challenge the environmental impacts of the facility’s operation through further testimony and discovery.

Plaintiffs can point to ICE’s control over how many detainees are moved into the facility, as well as the agency’s requirements for fencing, lighting, and security measures as evidence the actual operation is under “substantial federal control.”

Other NEPA lawsuits against ICE detention facilities continue to move forward.

Maryland secured a preliminary injunction barring the agency from renovating a warehouse after a federal judge called the absence of an environmental review a “crystal-clear example of a federal agency failing to comply with the basic requirements” of NEPA.

Michigan and New Jersey also moved to block ICE from converting warehouses into detention facilities, though their respective district courts have yet to issue orders.

The case is Friends of the Everglades v. Sec’y of the US Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 11th Cir., No. 25-12873, 4/21/26.