Florida higher education speech law blocked by appeals court

A divided federal appeals court on Tuesday kept Florida from enforcing higher education provisions of the Stop WOKE Act, ruling 2-1 that the restrictions on public college classroom instruction violate the First Amendment. The decision leaves in place a preliminary injunction against a 2022 law backed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis and preserves a path for Florida to seek review from the full 11th Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court.

The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit addresses how far a state may go in directing what public university professors can say when teaching. The panel majority rejected Florida’s argument that classroom speech by professors is government speech because instructors are paid by the state.

Judge Britt Grant, appointed by President Donald Trump, wrote for the majority that Florida’s theory would give the state sweeping authority over academic discussion in public universities. “If the First Amendment offers any boundary of protection at all for public university classrooms, this statute crosses it,” Grant wrote.

Grant was joined by Judge Charles Wilson, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton. Judge Barbara Lagoa, a Trump appointee and former Florida Supreme Court justice selected by DeSantis, dissented.

What the law restricted

The measure, formally known as the Individual Freedom Act, prohibited instruction that “espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels” students to accept specified concepts involving race, sex, national origin and privilege, according to the statute.

Those concepts included the idea that a person is inherently racist or sexist because of race or sex, and the idea that a person should feel guilt or psychological distress because of past actions by people of the same race or sex. DeSantis had promoted the law as part of his broader campaign against critical race theory, diversity programs and what he has described as “woke” ideology in education and workplaces.

The legal effect of Tuesday’s decision is procedural but significant: the appeals court affirmed a preliminary injunction, so the challenged higher education provisions remain blocked while the litigation proceeds. A preliminary injunction does not end the case, but it prevents enforcement during the court fight when plaintiffs meet the legal standard for interim relief.

The majority said the case required it to address an issue the Supreme Court has not resolved: the degree of First Amendment protection available to public university professors while teaching. Grant wrote that “hearing an idea you disagree with is not discrimination; it is an opportunity to come up with a better idea, or maybe even change your mind.”

Dissent and next steps

Lagoa argued in dissent that Florida has authority to decide what views may be endorsed in state-sponsored classrooms. “The First Amendment protects all viewpoints in the public square, whether they are conventional or controversial,” she wrote. “But it does not compel all viewpoints to be worthy of state-sponsored endorsement.”

Lagoa also said the majority had curtailed state control over public university teaching beyond what precedent allows. “This panel is not free to rewrite precedent simply because we dislike where it leads,” she wrote.

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier responded on X by praising Lagoa, writing that she “may be the best jurist in our country” and “should be on SCOTUS.” DeSantis did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The challenges were brought by professors, students and a student group that argued the law imposed unconstitutional censorship in classrooms. One case was filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Another was brought by the ACLU, ACLU of Florida, the Legal Defense Fund and Ballard Spahr.

Leah Watson, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Racial Justice Program, said in a statement that the decision “sets a strong precedent that higher education cannot be limited to the whims of politicians.” The same appeals court previously blocked a separate portion of the Stop WOKE Act that restricted workplace training.

This story draws on original reporting from CNBC.