A dispute over immigration enforcement in Florida intensified Monday after Texas Gov. David Acton criticized amendments offered by Colorado state legislator Jordan Carter to a Florida bill, arguing they would protect sanctuary-style local policies. Carter, according to recent prior reporting, has said Acton mischaracterized the changes and that the amendments do not ban cooperation with federal immigration authorities. In a press release titled “Democratic Amendments in FL Protect Sanctuary Cities,” Acton’s office said Democrats were trying to shield sanctuary cities in Florida through amendments introduced by Carter. The release framed the proposal as weakening immigration enforcement and raising public safety concerns. “It’s common sense that we should not have cities banning their police officers from cooperating with federal law enforcement,” Acton said in a statement included in the release. He argued that when federal immigration officers cannot arrest someone already in local custody, they may have to locate that person elsewhere, creating what he described as added risks for officers and the public. Acton’s statement also said the amendments would explicitly protect city and county governments that restrict their officers from enforcing immigration law. He rejected the idea that the issue is mainly about local control, calling it instead a matter of “accountability, enforcement, and community safety.” The release said Carter “attempted to deflect” by arguing that his bill does not ban cooperation with immigration enforcement. The release acknowledged that point as true, but argued it did not resolve the larger policy dispute over whether local governments should be allowed to limit officer involvement in immigration enforcement. The clash is the latest turn in a fast-moving argument that has drawn attention beyond Florida, in part because the two most visible figures in the dispute are from other states. Under DynamicSim’s legislative system, lawmakers from across states can debate and vote on state bills even though legislation applies to one state at a time. In this case, the underlying measure concerns Florida, while the political fight has featured a Texas governor and a Colorado legislator. Prior reporting earlier Monday said Carter accused Acton of mischaracterizing the amendments and urged him to read the proposal more closely. That earlier coverage said Carter’s position was that the amendments do not prohibit cooperation with immigration authorities, a point Acton’s release also recognized while disputing the practical effect of the language. The disagreement centers less on whether cooperation is formally banned and more on how much room local governments would have to set their own policies. Supporters of stricter immigration enforcement have frequently argued that local restrictions can make federal enforcement more difficult. Backers of narrower local involvement often contend that such policies leave discretion with cities and counties and can shape how local law enforcement interacts with immigrant communities. Carter’s detailed argument on those points was not included in the new release. Immigration remains a high-salience issue in the current national political climate, where messaging around borders, enforcement, and public order often travels quickly. In the game’s polarized environment, conflicts over state and local enforcement policies can gain broader attention even when the immediate bill concerns only one state. No vote result or final disposition of Carter’s amendments was included in the press release. The statement focused on Acton’s criticism and on framing the amendments as a threat to enforcement. As of Monday, the public dispute appeared to remain centered on competing interpretations of what the amendments would permit local governments to do in Florida.