This week, we got the kind of win that reminds us why we fight. A federal court just sided with the Everglades in a special-interest lawsuit over the EAA Reservoir.
On March 25, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit issued a unanimous ruling in favor of Everglades restoration. The court sided with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, rejecting Big Sugar’s lawsuit that sought to undermine the EAA Reservoir project—a cornerstone of Everglades restoration.
Even better: the court cited arguments made in the amicus brief filed by our coalition, including Captains For Clean Water, as part of the justification for its decision. This ruling is a complete vindication of the lower court’s original 2023 decision and a powerful affirmation of Everglades restoration.
A Lawsuit Designed to Undermine the EAA Reservoir
This case began back in 2021, when U.S. Sugar, Okeelanta Corp., and the Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida filed a lawsuit claiming the EAA Reservoir violated the “savings clause” of a 2000 water law.
They argued the Corps had to restore water levels they claimed were lost due to unrelated operational changes made after Hurricane Katrina—changes made to protect public safety, not related to restoration.
And they argued that the EAA Reservoir should be the project to provide that free water supply.
In 2023, the federal district court rejected that argument. So, the sugar industry appealed. Thankfully, the court rejected their argument again.
If they had won, the EAA Reservoir could have been forced to prioritize sugar’s water supply over environmental restoration—jeopardizing the reservoir’s purpose and threatening decades of restoration work. That would have meant more toxic discharges to the coasts and devastation for our waters, economy, and ways of life.
Why This Win Matters
This ruling clearly establishes that the savings clause does not apply to changes unrelated to restoration. The decision protects the EAA Reservoir’s mission: to store, treat, and send clean water south, restoring natural flow to the Everglades and reducing harmful discharges to Florida’s coasts.
It also:
- Reaffirms Congressional intent behind Everglades restoration. The savings clause was never meant to serve as an insurance policy for the sugar industry.
- Sets a critical legal precedent protecting future restoration projects from being hijacked by special interests demanding guarantees.
- Rejects Big Sugar’s efforts to use the courts to protect their interests at the expense of Florida’s environment.
- Cites Our Advocacy: The Court’s decision explicitly references the arguments made in our amicus brief, recognizing the environmental harm caused by current water mismanagement and the EAA Reservoir’s critical role in solving it.
Backed by the People
While court decisions rest on the law, the momentum behind Everglades restoration has always come from the people.
Over 16,000 of our supporters signed a petition urging Big Sugar to drop the lawsuit—a powerful show of public support that helped keep pressure on and bring attention to what was at stake.
This victory is shared by everyone who stood up, spoke out, and refused to let Big Sugar quietly sabotage restoration.
The Fight Isn’t Over
This is a moment to celebrate, but it’s not the end. Big Sugar continues to threaten the EAA Reservoir and restoration efforts—from lawsuits like this one to their proposed rock mine right next to the reservoir site.
So while we’ve won this battle, we’re staying ready for the next one.
For today though, let’s take a moment to appreciate what we’ve accomplished together: a landmark legal victory for the Everglades, for clean water, and for Florida’s future.
This week, we got the kind of win that reminds us why we fight.
On March 25, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit issued a unanimous ruling in favor of Everglades restoration. The court sided with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, rejecting Big Sugar’s lawsuit that sought to undermine the EAA Reservoir project—a cornerstone of Everglades restoration.
Even better: the court cited arguments made in the amicus brief filed by our coalition, including Captains For Clean Water, as part of the justification for its decision. This ruling is a complete vindication of the lower court’s original 2023 decision and a powerful affirmation of Everglades restoration.
A Lawsuit Designed to Undermine the EAA Reservoir
This case began back in 2021, when U.S. Sugar, Okeelanta Corp., and the Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida filed a lawsuit claiming the EAA Reservoir violated the “savings clause” of a 2000 water law.
They argued the Corps had to restore water levels they claimed were lost due to unrelated operational changes made after Hurricane Katrina—changes made to protect public safety, not related to restoration.
And they argued that the EAA Reservoir should be the project to provide that free water supply.
In 2023, the federal district court rejected that argument. So, the sugar industry appealed. Thankfully, the court rejected their argument again.
If they had won, the EAA Reservoir could have been forced to prioritize sugar’s water supply over environmental restoration—jeopardizing the reservoir’s purpose and threatening decades of restoration work. That would have meant more toxic discharges to the coasts and devastation for our waters, economy, and ways of life.
Why This Win Matters
This ruling clearly establishes that the savings clause does not apply to changes unrelated to restoration. The decision protects the EAA Reservoir’s mission: to store, treat, and send clean water south, restoring natural flow to the Everglades and reducing harmful discharges to Florida’s coasts.
It also:
- Reaffirms Congressional intent behind Everglades restoration. The savings clause was never meant to serve as an insurance policy for the sugar industry.
- Sets a critical legal precedent protecting future restoration projects from being hijacked by special interests demanding guarantees.
- Rejects Big Sugar’s efforts to use the courts to protect their interests at the expense of Florida’s environment.
- Cites Our Advocacy: The Court’s decision explicitly references the arguments made in our amicus brief, recognizing the environmental harm caused by current water mismanagement and the EAA Reservoir’s critical role in solving it.
Backed by the People
While court decisions rest on the law, the momentum behind Everglades restoration has always come from the people.
Over 16,000 of our supporters signed a petition urging Big Sugar to drop the lawsuit—a powerful show of public support that helped keep pressure on and bring attention to what was at stake.
This victory is shared by everyone who stood up, spoke out, and refused to let Big Sugar quietly sabotage restoration.
The Fight Isn’t Over
This is a moment to celebrate, but it’s not the end. Big Sugar continues to threaten the EAA Reservoir and restoration efforts—from lawsuits like this one to their proposed rock mine right next to the reservoir site.
So while we’ve won this battle, we’re staying ready for the next one.
For today though, let’s take a moment to appreciate what we’ve accomplished together: a landmark legal victory for the Everglades, for clean water, and for Florida’s future.