That’s what Judge Barbara Lagoa of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals called her harmful dissenting ruling. She stayed a lower court’s order that required shutting down nasty juvenile detention center they call “Alligator Alcatraz.” Ex-Miami District Judge Kathleen Williams has ordered the facility to shutter, 60 days from her ruling. Not only did she carry out serious violations of environmental regulations, but inhumane treatment of inmates.
Lagoa, who wrote the 2-1 ruling, with fellow Trump appointee Elizabeth Branch. They ridiculed Williams’s determination that the DeSantis administration had no choice but to adhere to federal environmental regulations. The ruling allows “Alligator Alcatraz” to continue its business while the lawsuit proceeds. This important decision seeks to balance the likely environmental consequences against damage to judicial proceedings.
Barbara Lagoa’s connections to the world of conservative politics are deep. In November 2019, Donald Trump nominated her to the 5th Circuit federal appeals court. Later that year, she became the first African American woman to serve on Florida’s Supreme Court after being appointed by Gov. Ron DeSantis. Both Lagoa and her husband, Paul Huck, are affiliated with the Federalist Society, a network of conservative lawyers that includes all three of Trump’s Supreme Court nominees: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.
Paul Huck is the senior partner at his firm, Lawson Huck Gonzalez, one of Florida’s most politically networked conservative law firms. His firm has played a huge role in shaping Florida’s political landscape. Since then, it’s been awarded more than $10 million in state contracts. Critics say this very intimate relationship would lead to significant conflicts of interest regarding Lagoa’s decisions.
Democratic state rep Anna Eskamani criticized Lagoa’s ruling. She stated,
“The potential risk that her husband can influence her decision in favor of the state in this highly contentious case puts the legitimacy of our judicial system at risk.”
Tessa Petit, associate director of the environmental advocacy group Climate Power, expressed concerns over Lagoa’s potential conflicts.
“It’s concerning to have on such an important case with huge ramifications for the environment a judge with that power to decide on this matter, with a husband that is working on high-profile political cases on behalf of DeSantis.”
No wonder that Judge Adalberto Jordan’s dissenting opinion called this out—Florida “conceded” that it established the camp “in parallel with” the federal government. He further stressed that the state did this on behalf of ICE. Jordan described the situation as involving “major federal action [that] affects the quality of the human environment,” underscoring the gravity of the matter.
“Judge Barbara Lagoa is definitely conflicted through her marriage to Paul Huck, and therefore, she has a personal interest that his firm maintains a good relationship with the state of Florida, as the state of Florida is his client.”
Lagoa’s office has defended her decision by referencing judicial ethics rules, asserting that her professional conduct adheres to established guidelines. Detractors are still unconvinced whether she can be fair and unbiased with her deep political ties.
Lagoa has recently played a role in assisting with the search for a new president at the University of West Florida. This involvement aligns with Governor DeSantis’s broader agenda to reshape the university’s traditionally liberal ethos into one more aligned with conservative values.
The tense, ongoing litigation around “Alligator Alcatraz” continues to unfold against the backdrop of these complex, political and ethical considerations. Stakeholders from all sides are actively working to understand what Lagoa’s ruling means. In the meantime, worries about judicial independence and environmental accountability still seem to be ruling the discourse.
The ongoing litigation surrounding “Alligator Alcatraz” continues to unfold amid these complex political and ethical considerations. As stakeholders from various sectors weigh in on the implications of Lagoa’s ruling, concerns about judicial independence and environmental accountability remain at the forefront.