ComplianceAtlas has published an updated report on Florida Action Committee v. Keefe, previously named Florida Action Committee v. Glass. Its latest coverage examines three defendants’ efforts to dismiss the amended complaint:

• Commissioner Keefe argues that he should answer for state registration laws, rather than local ordinances.
• Miami-Dade County argues that earlier litigation prevents the Florida Action Committee from bringing its current claims against the county.
• Orlando argues that the complaint and member declarations do not establish injuries tied to its ordinance.

These are the defendants’ arguments. They are not the court’s findings. The report examines how those arguments challenge the Florida Action Committee’s position that overlapping state and local restrictions must be considered together.

For families, that combined burden is central to this case. Housing rules, reporting duties, travel requirements and restrictions on public places can affect the same person at the same time. Our challenge asks the court to examine that combined impact.

In our October 27 weekly update, we reported 48 motions to dismiss and two response deadlines: November 16, 2026, for severance and transfer arguments, and December 18, 2026, for the remaining dismissal arguments. We also reported that discovery is paused while the motions are pending. These procedural steps do not decide our constitutional claims.

Thank you to ComplianceAtlas for examining the filings and helping readers distinguish legal arguments from court decisions.

Read the October 29 ComplianceAtlas update.