Civil Actions Brought by Unauthorized Aliens:
HB 71 would create a new section of Florida Statutes barring an “unauthorized alien” from commencing a civil action in Florida courts. The bill defines an unauthorized alien as a person unlawfully present in the United States under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, and directs that the term be interpreted consistently with applicable federal law and regulations. The bill contains no exceptions, procedural details, or enforcement mechanism beyond the categorical prohibition, and it would have taken effect July 1, 2025.
In practical terms, the measure would have affected access to Florida’s civil courts for undocumented immigrants by preventing them from filing lawsuits as plaintiffs. It would have added a new immigration-related limitation to state civil procedure and potentially affected a wide range of claims, depending on how broadly courts interpreted the prohibition. Because the bill was withdrawn prior to introduction, it did not advance into committee, receive votes, or become law.
If enacted, HB 71 would have created s. 45.022, Florida Statutes, imposing a new bar on civil actions initiated by unauthorized aliens. The measure would have directly affected undocumented immigrants seeking relief in Florida courts and could have influenced civil litigation involving personal injury, contract, property, and other claims. It would also have introduced a state-law restriction tied to federal immigration status, requiring courts to apply the federal definition of unlawful presence.
There is no recorded committee debate or vote history for HB 71, so formal legislative sentiment cannot be measured from transcripts or roll calls. The bill’s withdrawal prior to introduction suggests it did not receive enough support or was not pursued by its sponsor, but the available record does not indicate whether that was due to policy opposition, procedural concerns, or strategic reasons.
The main point of contention inherent in the bill is its categorical denial of access to civil courts for unauthorized aliens, which raises questions about fairness, due process, and the ability of undocumented residents to seek redress for injuries or disputes. Supporters of such a measure would likely frame it as an immigration enforcement or deterrence tool, while opponents would likely argue that civil court access should not depend on immigration status and that the bill could block legitimate claims and create constitutional or legal challenges. No specific stakeholder positions are recorded in the available materials.