Florida's persistent efforts to create its own immigration enforcement regime through legislation like Senate Bill 1718 (2023) and the subsequent SB 4-C (2025) have been repeatedly thwarted by federal courts. This legal saga is a profound demonstration of the Supremacy Clause in action, culminating in the U.S. Supreme Court's refusal to allow the state to enforce its controversial new crime of "illegal entry."
The core takeaway for citizens, travelers, and businesses is clear: the most punitive, immigrant-targeting sections of both lawsare currently blocked and remain unenforceable due to federal injunctions. The most recent and definitive ruling pertains to SB 4-C, enacted in 2025, which attempted to make it a state crime-a felony for a second offense-for anyone who entered the U.S. illegally to enter or remain in Florida. This created a direct, parallel state immigration enforcement system.
The Florida Immigrant Coalition and the Farmworker Association of Florida immediately challenged the law in the case FLORIDA IMMIGRANT COALITION v. UTHMEIER. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williamsapproved a Preliminary Injunction (PI) on April 30, 2025, blocking the law as the case continues. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to stay (freeze) the injunction in June 2025. Finally, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a powerful, unsigned order on July 9, 2025, denying Florida's request to be allowed to enforce the law while the litigation proceeds. This Supreme Court ruling leaves the federal injunction fully in place.
Judge Williams' ruling provided definitive insight into why SB 4-C likely violates the Supremacy Clause. The conflict arises from the state's attempt to supplant and obstruct the nuanced federal scheme:
- The law's mandatory detention provision and mandatory prison sentences conflict directly with the federal Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which allows federal actors broad discretion, including fines or probation for equivalent federal crimes.
- The judge wrote that the law "gives state officials authority to prosecute illegal entry or reentry in cases where federal actors may choose not to," thereby creating an "entirely separate enforcement scheme for essentially the same conduct regulated by the federal government."
In an extraordinary development, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams found Attorney General James Uthmeierin civil contempt on June 17, 2025. This stemmed from a show-cause order issued after Uthmeier sent a letter to law enforcement agencies arguing that the TRO did not properly restrain them from enforcing the law. The judge deemed this communication an effort to undermine the court's authority and potentially lead to unconstitutional arrests. As sanctions, the judge ordered the Attorney General to file biweekly reports detailing any arrests or law enforcement actions taken under the enjoined law.
The initial constitutional battle targeted Section 10 of SB 1718 (2023), which created a felony crime for knowingly transporting an individual into Florida who had entered the country without inspection.
On May 22, 2024, a federal court in Miami blocked this key provision, granting a preliminary injunction sought by a coalition of groups including the Farmworker Association of Florida, the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), and the American Immigration Council.
The court agreed that Section 10 caused "irreparable injury" to Floridians and travelers, putting them "at risk of being arrested, charged, and prosecuted with a felony" for simple daily activities.
Spencer Amdur, senior staff attorney with the ACLU, stated the court was right to block the "patently unconstitutional law, which had threatened Floridians with jail time for doing the most ordinary things, like going to work, visiting family, and driving kids to soccer games."
The court cited precedent that "prohibitions on the transportation, harboring, and inducement of unlawfully present aliens" fall into a "preempted field" that states cannot regulate. This injunction remains in effect, neutralizing the felony threat under this specific provision.
Despite the high-profile injunctions against the felony provisions of SB 1718 and SB 4-C, several impactful components of the laws remain in full force.
The E-Verify logo, which features a red and white stylized 'E' next to the white text "Verify," set against a waving background of the American flag in blue and dark red tones. - Requirement:Private employers with 25 or more employees and all public agencies must use the federal E-Verify system for new hires within three business days of the start date.
- Annual Certification Required:Covered employers must certify compliance on their first reemployment tax return each calendar year (Form RT-E Verify).
- Penalties:Failure to comply three times in any 24-month period can result in fines of $1,000 per day until the violation is cured, and potential suspension of business licenses.
- Impact:The law invalidates driver’s licenses issued by other states specifically to people who cannot provide proof of lawful presence.
- New Crime:Driving in Florida with one of these specifically invalidated out-of-state licenses is a criminal offense.
- Requirement:Hospitals that accept Medicaid are mandated to include a question on patient intake forms regarding whether the patient is lawfully present in the U.S.
- Caveat:Patients do not have to answer the question, and the law does not allow hospitals to deny care or report individual patient information to immigration authorities.
No. The Supreme Court only denied Florida's emergency request to enforcethe law while the case is being fully litigated. The case is now proceeding through the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, where the injunction remains in place.
Attorney General James Uthmeier was found in civil contempt for sending a communication to law enforcement agencies that a federal judge determined encouraged them to ignore the judicial order blocking SB 4-C, which undermined the court's authority and potentially led to unconstitutional arrests.
The key felony criminalization clauses transporting an uninspected person into the state (SB 1718) and the new state crime of entry/re-entry (SB 4-C)-are blocked by federal injunctions. However, the requirement to use a valid form of identification, which excludes certain out-of-state licenses, remains in effect.
The successive judicial defeats for the major criminal provisions of SB 1718 and SB 4-C, now solidified by the Supreme Court’s denial of emergency relief, send an undeniable signal: state-level attempts to commandeer federal immigration enforcement authority are highly likely to fail on constitutional grounds. The doctrine of federal preemption continues to serve as the chief legal obstacle to state anti-immigrant legislation.
While the most severe felony threats are currently neutralized, businesses and residents must remain fully compliant with the still-active E-Verify and driver's license requirements. This Florida immigration law update confirms that the constitutional debate is ongoing, but for now, the Constitution's supremacy prevails.