On Independence Day, Florida’s Attorney General, James Uthmeier, was actively countering immigration supporters in a submission to the U.S. Supreme Court. He urged the justices to decline requests that favor sustaining an injunction imposed by a federal judge, which blocks the new state law on immigration enforcement—a measure Uthmeier criticizes as an “extraordinary encroachment of authority.”

“The district court broadened its injunction to encompass every law enforcement officer in Florida, despite them not being direct defendants in the lawsuit,” Uthmeier stated on Friday, in response to a brief submitted by the Florida Immigrant Coalition, the Farmworker Association of Florida, and two individuals who are challenging the state over the new immigration statute.

“Plaintiffs’ response carries forward the same mistakes as the district court,” Uthmeier blasted.

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

Last month, the Florida AG asked the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and allow him to continue enforcing the new state law — known as SB 4-C, which criminalized the entry and presence in Florida of immigrants who have entered the United States illegally — after a federal judge blocked it with a preliminary injunction.

U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams issued a 14-day stay blocking the law on April 4 after it was signed into effect by Gov. Ron DeSantis in February. The legislation and its enforcement has been a powder keg for controversy, recently resulting in Uthmeier being held in contempt of court.

The AG’s emergency Supreme Court application asserts that his state’s inability to implement the new law has left Florida exposed and vulnerable to the “evil effects of illegal immigration,” which he describes as “more than sadistic.”

When Williams — a Barack Obama appointee — ordered the legislation not to be enforced, she reasoned it was the federal government’s responsibility to apprehend and litigate migrants, not individual states. She extended her order on April 18, and then issued a preliminary injunction on April 29, noting how the new law was “likely” unconstitutional.

Attorneys for the immigration groups and two plaintiffs filed a 41-page response brief to Uthmeier’s Supreme Court application last Wednesday, urging the nation’s highest court to shoot down the request and keep Williams’ injunction in place temporarily. They argued that SB 4-C “conflicts with the intricate federal scheme at every turn,” citing a 2024 ruling in a Texas case that established a “comprehensive framework” on what penalties apply for those who enter the United States unlawfully, according to the groups.

More from Law&Crime: ‘Too speculative and conclusory’: Trump DOJ tells environmental groups suing over ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ construction to take in the ‘flora and fauna’ elsewhere

“Congress has provided a range of tools and broad discretion to federal officials in order to balance a range of national interests, yet SB 4-C seeks to wrest control of one of those tools — criminal regulation of entry — from federal control and discretion, to be applied however Florida (and, presumably, any other state) sees fit,” the groups said.

Uthmeier hit back Friday with rebukes of those suing Florida and Williams specifically, saying their arguments are based on “a brooding intuition that immigration, writ large, is inherently and exclusively federal in nature.” The views stated on the matter, Uthmeier said, leave no role for states to regulate immigrants in any capacity.

“By disagreeing that illegal immigration is a national crisis, plaintiffs underplay the reality on the ground, putting them squarely at odds with the past two presidents,” Uthmeier asserted.

“SB 4-C represents Florida’s commonsense effort to combat the flood of illegal immigration into its borders,” he added. “Plaintiffs and the district court insist that Florida was powerless to adopt that law.”