Federal appeals court strikes down Florida's Stop WOKE Act as unconstitutional

A federal appeals court has ruled against Florida's Stop WOKE Act, declaring that the First Amendment does not permit the government to impose its own ideological orthodoxy—especially in college classrooms.

"The First Amendment is incompatible with an official government line—in a college classroom of all places," the court stated, overturning the state's attempt to combat ideological conformity by enforcing its own.

Background: Florida's Response to Social Justice Activism

The law, signed by Governor Ron DeSantis in 2022, was a high-profile response to peak social justice activism. It aimed to restrict colleges, schools, and workplaces from promoting certain viewpoints on racism, sexism, and history.

Speaking at the National Conservatism conference, DeSantis described the law's purpose:

"In Florida, parents should be able to send their kid to elementary school without having woke gender ideology shoved down their throat."

He referred to the prevailing ideology in many academic institutions and corporate HR departments as "the woke mind virus."

While many parents agreed with the sentiment, the law did not expand parental choice in education—Florida already has strong school choice policies. Instead, it sought to dictate what could be discussed in schools, colleges, and private workplaces.

Key Provisions of the Law

The legislation's preface specifies that it prohibits:

• Subjecting any individual, as a condition of employment, membership, certification, licensing, credentialing, or passing an examination, to training or instruction that:
• Espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels belief in specified concepts
• Concepts include those related to race, relative privilege, collective guilt, and other ideas consistent with social justice ideology

The state retains authority to determine whether discussions violate the ban.

Legal Challenges: 'Positively Dystopian'

Government intervention in classroom and workplace discussions drew immediate First Amendment challenges, and the law has not fared well in court.

2024 Ruling on Private Businesses

A three-judge panel for the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote in a 2024 order blocking the law's application to private businesses:

"The State of Florida seeks to bar employers from holding mandatory meetings for their employees if those meetings endorse viewpoints the state finds offensive. But meetings on those same topics are allowed if speakers endorse viewpoints the state agrees with, or at least does not object to."

The panel added:

"Florida may be exactly right about the nature of the ideas it targets. Or it may not. Either way, the merits of these views will be decided in the clanging marketplace of ideas rather than a codebook or a courtroom."

Earlier District Court Ruling on Colleges

A federal district court had previously issued a temporary injunction in a 2022 case brought in part by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) against the law's application to colleges and universities. The judge noted:

"The law officially bans professors from expressing disfavored viewpoints in university classrooms while permitting unfettered expression of the opposite viewpoints… This is positively dystopian."

The July 7 Appeals Court Decision

The 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the 2022 ruling. Writing for the majority, Judge Britt C. Grant stated:

"Viewpoint-based restrictions designed to compel or ban a set of beliefs are dangerous in any setting, and they are especially pernicious in the classroom context."

She continued:

"Though the government has plenty of ways to promote its own viewpoint, puppeteering every university professor in the state is not one of them. Forcing an official government line—in a college classroom of all places—is exactly the 'pall of orthodoxy' that the First Amendment will not tolerate."

Judge Grant concluded:

"Universities and professors do not always get it right. Neither does the government. Our Constitution is unique in its commitment to letting the people, rather than the government, find the right equilibrium."

Key Takeaway

The courts are not taking a position on whether the "woke" ideas targeted by the Florida law are good or bad. They allow that state lawmakers may be entirely correct about the toxic nature of the targeted ideology. However, the fundamental principle remains: the U.S. government is not permitted to impose its own orthodoxy to combat what it sees as the wrong kind of orthodoxy.

This article is adapted from commentary by J.D. Tuccille and Reason. The original reporting on the July 7 decision was provided by the Florida Courier's Kerry Sheridan Wusf.