But Moore turned that argument on its head and noted that the state law prohibits something the federal law allows: American companies to bid on public contracts even if they are affiliated with companies doing work in Cuba.

Monday’s ruling allows Odebrecht to continue operating as it has been, including negotiating with the Miami-Dade Aviation Department to develop Airport City, a project that would bring hotels, office and retail to Miami International Airport. The project has stalled because county commissioners, objecting to Odebrecht’s Cuba connection, were wary of giving the firm another contract.

It is unclear how many other companies would be affected by the law in addition to Odebrecht, the law’s chief target.

The legislation, sponsored by two Republicans, state Rep. Michael Bileca of Miami and Sen. Rene Garcia of Hialeah, drew little attention during the annual lawmaking session earlier this year in Tallahassee. But after it was approved, the Miami-Dade county attorney opined the law was unenforceable. And business interests, including the Florida Chamber of Commerce and the governments of Brazil and Canada, Florida’s top two trading partners, raised concerns that the law could slow foreign investment in the state.

When Scott, the Republican, pro-business governor, traveled to Miami’s Freedom Tower to sign the law, he stirred controversy among Cuban-American lawmakers by issuing a statement shortly afterward suggesting the law was unconstitutional and could not be enforced without federal action. He later backed away from that stance and said his administration would defend the law against a likely legal challenge.

Still, one of Odebrecht’s attorneys, James E. Moye, cited the governor’s signing statement as proof that the state knew the law is unconstitutional. While the federal government allows states to withhold public contracts from certain “scrutinized” companies that work in Iran and Sudan, it does not authorize them to do the same with the two other countries considered sponsors of terrorism, Cuba and Syria.

From the beginning of the hearing, Judge Moore hinted at how he would rule in the case. He asked FDOT’s attorney to speak first — even though Odebrecht had filed the motion for the preliminary injunction — and peppered him with questions.

Martin cited a 2006 Florida law prohibiting state colleges and universities from using public funds to pay for travel to Cuba or other states sponsors of terrorism. That law was upheld by a federal appellate court, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up the case on Monday.

But Moore said that case, which originated at Florida International University, applied only narrowly to academic travel and other educational purposes. He sided instead with Odebrecht’s Moye, who cited three other federal cases as precedent.

In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Massachusetts law restricting businesses in the state from working with companies tied to Myanmar. The same year, a federal judge overturned Miami-Dade County’s requirement that companies certify that they did not work in Cuba. And in 2009, another federal judge ruled against a 2008 Florida law setting increased fees and bonds for travel agencies specializing in trips to Cuba.

Garcia, the legislation’s Senate sponsor, learned of the judge’s ruling from a Miami Herald reporter and said he was “very disappointed” — particularly because the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the law in the FIU case to stand.

“When we talk about education, that’s about [restricting] public dollars,” he said. “I don’t see any difference between that and what the Cuba and Syria bill is doing.”