The legal issues surrounding Florida’s Alligator Alcatraz are starting to pile up.
This week alone, a Judge ordered the state to provide more transparency regarding agreements allowing the facility to function and another Judge ordered Florida to halt construction over concerns it runs afoul of environmental law.
The former case stemmed from concerns that detainees had restricted access to lawyers, as plaintiffs sought more insight into those detaining and overseeing migrants. The latter case was backed by environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe, arguing the facility, located in the Everglades, poses environmental threats due to construction needed for the detainment center to function.
Concerns about operational issues and construction problems aren’t surprising given that the facility was propped up in just a few weeks this Summer after first being publicly floated. Now, the state has to spend money defending these issues in court, adding to the already exorbitant costs to house the migrants in the first place.
And these weren’t the only black marks on the facility to emerge this week. A former contract worker spoke to NBC6 about the “inhumane” conditions at Alligator Alcatraz, for both detainees and workers.
She described the structures holding migrants as “an oversized kennel.”
“They have no sunlight. There’s no clock in there. They don’t even know what time of the day it is,” she said. “They have no access to showers. They shower every other day or every four days.”
Weeks ago, when noting the potential political win among the GOP base for Attorney General James Uthmeier in backing the facility, we nevertheless called attention to several underlying faults with the facility: notably potential construction flaws and concerns about the dehumanization of those kept there.
More and more, those problems are coming into full view.
This likely won’t impact the core GOP base that pushed for harsh measures to deal with an admittedly inept immigration system under former President Joe Biden. But the more that independents and more moderate Republicans see these issues fester, the more public pushback against the facility could build.
And even if not, the courts could be stepping in to intervene.
Now, it’s onto our weekly game of winners and losers.
Winners
Honorable mention: Carolina Amesty. Amesty has secured multiple legal wins the past few weeks in no doubt due to strong legal representation, sound legal arguments and absolutely no other considerations.
Just a few weeks ago, Amesty had her criminal forgery records purged from public view after she hired attorney Michael Sasso to represent her.
In totally unrelated news, Sasso is a Gov. Ron DeSantis ally who formerly served on the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District Board and is married to now-Florida Supreme Court Justice Meredith Sasso. Sounds like a good hire!
Now before you go drawing any nefarious conclusions, dear reader, this actually is fairly standard practice. You see, Amesty already negotiated a sweetheart plea deal to avoid trial on charges against her, and it is fairly routine for records to be hidden from public view in those circumstances. So, fair enough.
But, let’s think here, how was it that the plea deal was cooked up in the first place? After all, Amesty was accused of notarizing a signed document for her family’s academy while the man who purportedly signed it says he never did.
Oh, that’s right. It was the DeSantis-appointed State Attorney Andrew Bain who, purely out of unbiased legal considerations, decided to offer the deal to the former Republican lawmaker. That decision absolved Amesty of any serious legal consequences and set the stage for the recent records purge.
What a great string of luck. But then came even more legal trouble for Amesty. This time, it was the federal government accusing her of fraudulently acquiring $122,000 in COVID relief money.
Those are the big dogs, and we already saw another Republican lawmaker in Joe Harding do time for COVID relief fraud.
Amesty seemed backed into a corner. But then, voila, this week her attorney wrote in a court filing that “the government had ceased its criminal investigation related to grand jury proceedings it referenced in its July 11 filing and withdrew its outstanding subpoenas. We understand that the government no longer plans to seek an indictment.”
Again, completely unrelated, Amesty’s attorney is Brad Bondi. If that last name sounds familiar, that’s because his sister, Pam Bondi, is currently the U.S. Attorney General, i.e. the person who is now at the top of the very Justice Department that was charging Amesty in the first place.
Last unrelated section of this post: If you ever hear a prominent politician talk about draining the swamp and don’t immediately burst into laughter at this point, then you’ve got stronger willpower than we do.
Almost (but not quite) the biggest winner: Joe Gruters. Two weeks ago, we featured both Gruters and newly appointed Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia on our winners list for machinations that seemed to open the path for Gruters to serve as Republican National Committee (RNC) Chair, removing the biggest threat to Ingoglia winning a full term as CFO next year.
Well, that path is now wide open for Gruters, as he is unopposed in the RNC Chair election.
RNC members will meet in Atlanta on Aug. 22, where they will select someone to succeed current Chair Michael Whatley, who is stepping down to run for Senate.
That “someone” will be Gruters, who has already earned President Donald Trump’s endorsement and now will step up from RNC Treasurer to leading the national organization. That will allow Gruters a national spotlight far beyond what he’s experienced before.
“I’ve been ready for this,” Gruters told Florida Politics. “I’ve been wanting to do this forever.”
He won’t have to wait much longer.
The biggest winner: Ingoglia. Speaking of Ingoglia, his tenure as CFO is doing plenty to raise his name ID as well.
Ingoglia has been blitzing around the state as Florida’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is ramping up pressure on local leaders to provide the state information on spending and revenue.
Florida DOGE has expanded its original set of targets — Broward County, Gainesville and Manatee County — to scrutinize Miami-Dade County, Orange County, Jacksonville, the Tampa-St. Pete region, and more.
Now, we’ve raised questions about how much of this is motivated by political concerns and how much is a genuine effort to ensure taxpayer funds are being spent properly. Those questions continued this week as Ingoglia tried to turn the Jacksonville effort into an attack on the city’s Democratic Mayor, even though the City Council — which actually formulates the city budget — is controlled by Republicans.
So on the underlying merits of these audits, consider the jury still very much out. It’s not that the state can’t find waste — any sharp eye can find waste in most governmental entities. It’s the selective nature of these efforts combined with the state very much being secretive when it comes to scrutiny of its work.
But for Ingoglia personally, he’s definitely making the most of the first few weeks on the job.
You’ll notice that the list of municipalities targeted by Florida DOGE is — perhaps coincidentally, perhaps not — also a list of some of the state’s biggest media markets. And Ingoglia has been getting plenty of media attention as he darts from county to county raising hell over local spending.
Plus, we’ll admit, Ingoglia’s alternative name for Florida DOGE — the Florida Agency for Fiscal Oversight, or FAFO — is catchy and would distinguish Florida’s effort from the federal initiative led by an increasingly unpopular Elon Musk.
Ingoglia’s immediate predecessor just made it to Congress after his tenure leading the Office. Ingoglia may have a bright future ahead as well as he continues making himself known among the state’s Republican base.
Losers
Dishonorable mention: City of Miami. Apparently Miami lawmakers looking to give themselves another year in office just don’t know when to quit, despite multiple legal losses already.
This saga started in June when City Commissioners narrowly voted 3-2 to push back the scheduled 2025 election until 2026.
The move would align the contest with the state’s General Election slate. That has some potential merit, in theory, as it can save costs and will almost certainly increase voter participation. But it carries the convenient side effect — at least for those currently in office — of extending the terms of several officials an extra year.
Leading up to the move, and afterward, Attorney General James Uthmeier threatened to sue the city, arguing that such a shift would have to go before voters in the form of a referendum. Mayoral candidate Emilio González sued instead and won.
An appeals court later upheld that decision via a three-Judge panel, seemingly putting Miami on its back foot.
But the city is not backing down. City officials are requesting an en banc hearing at the appeals court level, meaning all judges would hear the case, rather than just three.
This is all costing the city money to defend, when they could instead just stand down and put this question to voters like they should have in the first place.
That move, of course, would mean the change wouldn’t take place for this upcoming election, meaning those facing term limits wouldn’t get an extra year in office.
That shouldn’t matter if the real motive is the stuff we listed above — cutting costs, driving more voters to the polls, etc.
But with current elected officials pushing so hard to lock this change in now, it makes you wonder whether that is the real motive after all.
Almost (but not quite) the biggest loser: Gary Farmer. For a state where Democrats often serve as a bumbling punching bag, Farmer’s tenure in the Senate stood out even still.
That was primarily due to two episodes: one involving Farmer’s big mouth, and another resulting in his resignation as Senate Democratic Leader.
Well, they say history tends to rhyme, and we got a mash-up of Farmer’s greatest hits this week when he was forced to resign as a Broward County Judge due to a Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) inquiry into, you guessed it, Farmer’s big mouth.
Complaints about Farmer’s conduct from the bench began bubbling up late last year. First, Farmer was reassigned from the criminal division to civil court. Then came further JQC scrutiny that ended with Farmer being suspended.
The comments in question included making a joke about gay sex from the bench and telling a defendant who had fathered children from multiple mothers not to get his new Public Defender pregnant, among other remarks.
Following Farmer’s controversy-riddled tenure in the Senate, which saw him leave early rather than face an incumbent-on-incumbent Primary due to redistricting, he won the race to serve as a Judge in Broward.
As we wrote when this latest blemish on his public record first emerged, the position as judge “gave him a landing spot and allowed him the chance to continue in public service without any further messy public incidents, as judges at his level are rarely under the same scrutiny as Florida’s 40 Senators.”
Somehow, he has even screwed that up to the extent that he’s now leaving the position entirely.
This isn’t the first time Farmer has made a fool of himself on the public stage. But given how many chances he’s had at serving that he subsequently bungled, this likely should be — and probably will be — his last.
The biggest loser: Cory Mills. When news broke in March that Mills was facing an ethics probe, we wrote that it was “increasingly difficult to follow through with his promise to mount a Senate Primary challenge to Republican U.S. Sen. Ashley Moody in 2026.”
Mills’ personal problems have continued to pile up in public, leaving some to wonder whether he’ll even continue serving in the House.
The latest this week: accusations from an ex that Mills threatened to harm men she dated after him, and that Mills repeatedly warned he would release revenge porn.
That ex also happens to be reigning Miss United States Lindsey Langston, who also serves in politics as a Florida Republican State Committeewoman — a standing that makes it less likely this story goes away outside of an agreement between the parties.
Texts between Mills and Langston, if they’re legit, are repulsive and remind of some of the worst behavior of jealous, insecure ex-boyfriends. It’s certainly completely unbecoming of a member of Congress if true.
Mills has tried to spin a legal win this week into exoneration after a judge declined to issue a restraining order against Mills. But while that is a favorable finding for Mills, it’s not a finding that he did nothing wrong.
So this story may continue developing, on top of a lawsuit for unpaid rent and that above-mentioned ethics investigation.
And remember, Democrats are already making efforts to target Mills in 2026 in what is, as of now, expected to be a good cycle for Democrats. Republicans still have an advantage here, but at what point is it worth ditching a candidate dealing with this much controversy and running a safe pick who is less susceptible to an upset?
Post Views: 0