Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(157,285 posts)
Wed Jul 9, 2025, 04:03 PM Jul 9

Supreme Court won't let Florida enforce controversial immigration law

Source: USA Today

Updated July 9, 2025, 3:13 p.m. ET


WASHINGTON − Florida can't enforce a controversial new law targeting undocumented immigrants entering Florida, the Supreme Court said on July 9 in rejecting an emergency appeal from the state. The decision leaves in place a lower court's pause on the law while it's being challenged.

The law, which made it a felony for certain immigrants to enter Florida, was passed to help carry out President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier told the Supreme Court the law is needed to protect residents from "the deluge of illegal immigration." "If a State's police powers are powers at all, they allow a State to criminalize harms destructive to the community," he wrote in the appeal.

Seventeen states told the Supreme Court they're backing Florida's position as did the Trump administration.

Read more: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/07/09/supreme-court-florida-immigration-law/84450434007/



Link to ORDER (PDF) - https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/070925zr_6537.pdf

Shadow docket.
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court won't let Florida enforce controversial immigration law (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Jul 9 OP
We need to scream as loudly about this unsigned opinion, JMCKUSICK Jul 9 #1
Well what is ironic BumRushDaShow Jul 9 #2
They didn't rule on a petition for cert. They denied a stay request. Meaning at least five opposed granting the stay. onenote Jul 9 #3
Which is ironic. BumRushDaShow Jul 9 #4
More background. onenote Jul 9 #5
Which is ironic BumRushDaShow Jul 9 #6

JMCKUSICK

(3,276 posts)
1. We need to scream as loudly about this unsigned opinion,
Wed Jul 9, 2025, 04:50 PM
Jul 9

as we do about the ones we hate.
They've made so many unsigned rulings that have changed the legal landscape of this country. For better or worse, these cases all need daylight.

BumRushDaShow

(157,285 posts)
2. Well what is ironic
Wed Jul 9, 2025, 05:09 PM
Jul 9

is that Thomas is in charge of the 11th Circuit emergency requests (and FL is under the 11th Circuit) and his name was of course mentioned in the order (I believe they would have needed at least 4 of them to agree to certiorari to hear the case).

onenote

(45,490 posts)
3. They didn't rule on a petition for cert. They denied a stay request. Meaning at least five opposed granting the stay.
Wed Jul 9, 2025, 07:20 PM
Jul 9

Interestingly, Thomas could have granted the stay unilaterally and not referred it to the court. That he didn't and that there are no dissents noted indicates that this was unanimous.

Denials of stay request typically are not accompanied by opinions.

onenote

(45,490 posts)
5. More background.
Wed Jul 9, 2025, 07:31 PM
Jul 9

The US District Court issued a preliminary injunction against the Florida statute. On June 17, Florida AG Uthmeier filed an application for stay pending appeal of the district court decision to the 11th Circuit and for an administrative stay pending a decision on his application for stay. It was filed with Thomas, the SCOTUS justice assigned to hear stay requests from courts in the 11th Circuit. Thomas did not act immediately; rather he waited until June 24 to set a deadline of July 2 for the other side to respond to Uthmeier's application. He could have but did not grant the stay unilaterally or order an administrative stay while the application for stay pending appeal was being considered. After additional briefing by both sides on July 5, 7, and 8, Thomas referred the matter to the entire court today, and later in the day the court issued its order denying the application.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court won't let F...