Any Questions?
We are ready to answer all your questions. Just fill the form and we will call you soon.
Temporary Restraining Order on Florida’s Immigration Law
In my recent interview on “Cada Tarde” with Agustín Acosta from Actualidad Radio, we discussed a temporary restraining order (TRO) that has halted the enforcement of Florida’s Senate Bill 4C. This law would have made it a criminal offense for undocumented adults to enter or reenter the state of Florida. Although it was initially set to punish first-time offenders with up to nine months in jail and make reentry a third-degree felony without the possibility of bail, the federal court has placed it on hold for now.
For anyone who may have been arrested under the law, there is a window of opportunity to seek bond or dismissal of the charges due to the TRO. On April 18, a hearing will take place to determine whether the court will issue a longer-lasting injunction to block the law while the lawsuit is pending.
We also touched on other topics such as recent legal challenges to the humanitarian parole programs for Venezuelans, Nicaraguans, Cubans, and Haitians, as well as questions around TPS renewals for Venezuelans. If you need guidance, feel free to reach out to my office at 305-671-0018.
Original Transcript
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Como cada lunes a esta hora de la tarde, saludamos a la doctora Martha Arias, nuestra abogada de inmigración. Doctora, muy buenas tardes. ¿Qué tal? ¿Cómo va todo?
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Buenas tardes, Agustín. Un saludo para usted y para toda la audiencia de Actualidad Radio. Feliz comienzo de semana.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Claro que sí. Bueno, doctora, hablemos de una decisión muy importante que afecta a las personas que viven aquí en la Florida, porque la Legislatura del estado había promulgado una ley que firmó el gobernador DeSantis, y que imponía penas de cárcel en ciertas condiciones a personas indocumentadas. Y hoy ha habido una definición de un tribunal federal. Explíquenos, por favor.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, efectivamente la Legislatura estatal de la Florida emitió una ley estatal, que es el proyecto de ley del Senado 4-C. Esa ley, como usted bien dijo, convertía en un delito penal que un adulto entrara ilegalmente al estado de la Florida. Se consideraba un delito menor, con hasta nueve meses de cárcel.
El segundo delito descrito en la ley era la reentrada ilegal; es decir, que alguien volviera a entrar ilegalmente a los Estados Unidos y, por ende, a la Florida. En ese caso, la ley lo consideraba un delito mayor (felonía) de tercer grado. El problema con este segundo delito es que la persona arrestada no tendría derecho a fianza, porque la misma ley establece la presunción de que el individuo no se presentaría a ninguna audiencia.
Esta ley fue demandada a principios de este año. Entró en vigor el 13 de febrero, y ahora, en abril, fue demandada en el Distrito Sur de Florida por la Florida Immigrant Coalition. El viernes 4 de abril, el juez de dicho distrito emitió una orden de restricción temporal (Temporary Restraining Order), que impide la aplicación de esta ley en el estado de la Florida por ahora. Las partes tendrán una audiencia para determinar si se concede una orden de prohibición temporal más prolongada (injunction) mientras el litigio está pendiente.
Para que la audiencia entienda, la diferencia es que la orden de restricción temporal dura 14 días y suspende la aplicación de la ley; el injunction, si lo concede el juez, prohíbe la aplicación de la ley durante todo el tiempo que el caso esté pendiente. El 18 de abril las partes se presentarán para que el juez decida si concede ese injunction.
Por ahora, desde el 4 de abril y por 14 días, la policía no puede aplicar la ley. Eso trae un poco de tranquilidad a las personas que están indocumentadas en la Florida y temían ser arrestadas por un oficial local o del condado y enfrentar hasta nueve meses de cárcel. Mucha gente me llama a mi oficina asustada por esto, porque esos nueve meses de cárcel suenan bastante intimidantes.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Doctora, la orden del juez establece esta medida cautelar —en inglés se llama Temporary Restraining Order—, ¿pero qué pasa si una persona fue arrestada y está en la cárcel actualmente porque cayó hace dos, tres o cuatro semanas? ¿Sale o se queda?
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Esa persona puede salir. Por medio de su abogado penalista (porque esto es un tema penal, no de inmigración), se puede pedir una fianza o incluso la terminación del caso, porque la ley no se puede aplicar mientras exista esa orden de restricción temporal.
Ahora, como dije, el 18 de abril hay una audiencia para que el juez decida si va a otorgar el injunction. El injunction, a diferencia de la orden de restricción temporal, puede prolongarse por todo el tiempo que el caso esté pendiente en la corte.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Perfecto. ¿Hay algún otro tema de inmigración que haya ocurrido desde el jueves hasta hoy? Porque ya hemos perdido la cuenta de cuántas demandas hay por aquí y por allá. Tendríamos que sentarla un día entero con una computadora para estar al tanto de todo: son tantas demandas, recursos y distintos tribunales que uno se pierde. ¿Hay algo más importante que mencionar?
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, aparentemente fue presentada otra demanda en contra de la cancelación del parole humanitario para venezolanos, nicaragüenses, cubanos y haitianos en el estado de Massachusetts, en Boston. No quiero dar toda la información aún porque no he tenido tiempo de leerla completa hoy, pero esta semana informaré más detalles en mi Instagram. Supongo que, como hemos visto, se está pidiendo que ese parole no sea cancelado por razones legales o constitucionales que se consideren pertinentes.
En el caso de la ley de la Florida, los demandantes basaron su demanda en dos argumentos principales: uno, la violación del principio de supremacía, que establece que la Constitución y la ley federal priman sobre la ley estatal en caso de conflicto; y otro, la cláusula de comercio (Commerce Clause), que habla también de la jurisdicción federal y estatal. Esos fueron los dos argumentos constitucionales presentados para pedir la medida temporal.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Con respecto a los venezolanos que estaban en peligro de quedarse sin TPS, por la decisión del tribunal de California de la semana pasada, ¿les recomendaría no hacer nada, quedarse tranquilos?
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
No, no hacer nada no es una buena idea. En este momento, a los venezolanos que se les vence el TPS entre abril y septiembre les recomendaría entrar a la página de USCIS y hacer la renovación de su TPS.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
¿Ya se puede hacer la renovación?
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, el sistema lo está permitiendo.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Perfecto. Entonces, hasta que el gobierno no haga nada en contra, como si no hubiera pasado nada. Se sigue adelante con las renovaciones.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, porque un juez ordenó que se mantenga vigente, y de hecho la página de USCIS está permitiendo las renovaciones y el cobro de las tarifas.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
En el pasado, al renovar el TPS, ¿qué tiempo pasaba aproximadamente para recibir respuesta?
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Normalmente de tres a cuatro meses, pero a veces hasta ocho meses. Muchas personas incluso estuvieron casi un año sin respuesta. Sin embargo, mientras la renovación está pendiente, la persona no queda fuera de estatus.
Esto se parece al caso del DACA cuando se hizo una segunda extensión y mucha gente aplicó, quedó pendiente y luego un juez dijo que no procedía. Les devolvieron el dinero, pero mientras tanto estuvieron protegidos. Aquí podría pasar algo parecido: si en algún momento el juez decide que no va a aplicar, entonces a partir de ese momento dejaría de cubrir, pero mientras tanto, mientras esté pendiente, las personas no incurrirían en presencia ilegal.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
¿Y qué tiempo tienen para renovar? Es decir, ¿cuál es la ventana de tiempo para hacerlo?
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
En teoría, la ventana empezó en enero, pero al pausarse todo por la decisión judicial, se paralizó. Sin embargo, en este momento no hay un límite estricto; las personas pueden entrar y renovar.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Excelente, muy buena información la que nos trae hoy. Feliz semana.
DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Gracias a usted. Feliz resto de semana.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Amigos, conversamos con la doctora Martha Arias, quien siempre nos acompaña para temas de inmigración. El teléfono de su bufete es el 305-671-0018. Si usted va en el auto ahora y no tiene papel o lápiz, no se preocupe: cuando llegue a su buscador de internet, ponga “Martha Arias abogada de inmigración” o “Martha Arias immigration attorney” y la va a encontrar fácilmente aquí en el sur de la Florida. Recuerde, su número de oficina es 305-671-0018.
English Transcript
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Like every Monday at this time of the afternoon, we greet attorney Martha Arias, our immigration lawyer. Attorney, good afternoon. How are you? How is everything going?
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Good afternoon, Agustín. Greetings to you and to all the audience of Actualidad Radio. Happy start of the week.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Certainly. Well, attorney, let’s talk about a very important decision that affects people who live here in Florida, because the Florida legislature had passed a law that the governor DeSantis signed, which imposed jail sentences in certain conditions on undocumented people. And today there has been a ruling from a federal court. Please explain.
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Yes, indeed, the Florida state legislature issued a state law, which is Senate Bill 4-C. That law, as you said, turned it into a criminal offense for an adult who entered illegally or who enters illegally into the state of Florida. It is considered a misdemeanor, a small offense, and it carries up to nine months in jail.
And the second offense is for a person who reenters, that is, returns and enters the United States and the state of Florida illegally. In that case, it is already a third-degree felony. The problem with this second felony of reentering the United States and the state of Florida illegally is that the person who is arrested does not have the right to bail, because the law itself says that it will be considered that the person will not show up, as it is obvious that they will not appear at any hearing. So, it is like a presumption established by the law itself.
This law was sued early this year. The law came out on February 13, and now in April it was sued in the state of Florida, in the Southern District here, by the Florida Immigrant Coalition, which filed the lawsuit. On Friday, which was April 4, the judge here in the Southern District issued a precautionary measure, a temporary restraining order, meaning that this law cannot be enforced in the state of Florida for now. The parties will have a hearing to determine if it is possible to have a temporary injunction while the litigation is pending. To make people understand, there is a difference between an injunction, which is a measure or temporary prohibition on applying a law now, and a temporary restraining order. They are two different legal figures, two different requests. So, on April 18, the parties will confer or have a hearing to determine if the injunction—meaning the precautionary measure that the law cannot be enforced while the lawsuit is pending—will operate or not. For now, it is 14 days from April 4, since last week, during which the police cannot enforce this law. This means that the biggest scare, fear, the concern that most people who are in the United States illegally had about being arrested by a police officer, a local or county enforcement officer, well, for now, they can rest a bit and be calm that the police will not be able to arrest them under the enforcement of this state law. I think that is super important, Agustín, because believe me, I receive calls at my office; most people are frightened by this, obviously because we are talking about a nine-month jail sentence, which everyone sees as very, very intimidating.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Attorney, the law—or rather, the judge’s order establishes this precautionary measure, in English an injunction, but what happens—
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
No.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
It’s not an injunction.
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
No, in English it’s called a Temporary Restraining Order.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Ok, a restraining order. Ok, what happens if someone was arrested and is currently in jail because they got caught two, three, or four weeks ago? Do they get out or do they stay?
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
They get out. That person, through their criminal lawyer, I imagine—because this is a criminal offense, not immigration—can request bail or even termination of the case, because the law cannot be enforced under this temporary restraining order.
Now, as I said, on the 18th of this month the parties have a hearing for the judge to determine whether to grant the injunction. The injunction does have a longer duration than the restraining order. The restraining order can only be given for 14 days. After that, when the parties have the hearing, the judge will decide if they are going to grant the injunction. The injunction is valid for the entire time the case is pending in court.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Perfect. Is there any other matter that is going on? Because we have lost track of how many lawsuits are filed here and there. We would have to seat you here the whole day with a computer to stay up to date with everything, because there are so many lawsuits and so many motions and so many first-instance courts, appeals courts, supreme courts, that one loses track. Is there anything else important that has happened in immigration since last Thursday?
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Yes, apparently there was a lawsuit filed against the cancellation of the humanitarian parole for Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Haiti in the state of Massachusetts, in Boston. But I do not want to give all the information yet because I have not had time to read it thoroughly today, since it has been a busy day. However, if you like, tomorrow or this week I will post on my Instagram. I imagine that, as we have seen, it is a lawsuit where they request that it not be revoked or that it not be canceled for any legal or constitutional reasons that the parties consider. In the case of the Florida Law, for example, there were two main reasons. One is what the plaintiffs consider a violation of what is called the Supremacy Clause, which says that the Constitution and Federal Law have supremacy over state law, and that when a State is in violation or in conflict with Federal Law, the Federal law prevails.
And the other is the commerce law, the Commerce Clause, which also talks about that federal and state jurisdiction. Those are the two constitutional arguments made by the plaintiff parties to request this temporary measure.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Regarding Venezuelans who were in danger of losing TPS due to last week’s ruling by the California court, would you recommend they do nothing? Should they stay calm?
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
No, no, no, doing nothing is not a good idea. Right now, Venezuelans, at this time, I think all those whose TPS was expiring in April and now—hey, we are at April 7—those who expire in September, go to the USCIS page and renew your TPS.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Ok. You can already do the renewal?
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
It can be done. The system is allowing it.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Ok, perfect. So until the government does something, it’s as if nothing happened. Go ahead with the renewals.
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Yes, because a judge said it had to remain in effect, and in fact the USCIS page is allowing TPS renewals and payment.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
And in terms of the past, under the previous standard, once someone requested a renewal online, how long did it take for them to be given the response of the renewal already approved?
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Normally it was around three to four months in normal terms, but sometimes it could take up to eight months. Many people had up to almost a year without it, and some—
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
They were not left out, right? Even if it expired, if they had filed the renewal, that action alone of trying the renewal did not leave them out?
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Correct, they were not left out. Well, what happens is that your question is similar to the DACA issue when there was a second extension of DACA and many people applied and it was left on hold, and then a judge came and said that second extension of DACA did not apply, and they had to return the money to people, but they were protected during that extension while that renewal application was pending. Here we could talk about the same; at least while it is pending, they are protected. And if later the government comes and says no, or a judge says no, that it will not apply, then obviously from that moment on, no. But at this moment, while it is pending, they would not incur unlawful presence, which is important for them to have that protection.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
And how much time does one have to renew, that is, what is the time window for doing the renewal?
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Well, that is what is important, because supposedly the time window had already started since January, but when it was paused, that remained there in limbo, or the Department of Homeland Security did not allow continuing with the extensions or the renewals, at least for TPS for 2023, so it was halted. Meanwhile, those from 2021 could do extensions, and they continued doing them. So at this moment, there is no set limit, let’s put it that way; people can go in and do it.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Excellent. Very good information that you bring today. Have a good week.
ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Thank you. A happy rest of the week to you.
AGUSTÍN ACOSTA:
Friends, we spoke with attorney Martha Arias, who is always with us for immigration matters. The telephone number of her law firm is 305-671-0018. If you are in the car now and do not have paper or a pen, do not worry. When you get to the internet search engine, type her name and surname—hers—and you will find her here in South Florida, “Martha Arias immigration attorney,” or directly at the legal office by calling 305-671-0018.
