Business

DeSantis-backed 'Stop WOKE' law meets appeals court block, teeing up possible Supreme Court fight

CNBC July 07, 2026 5 views
DeSantis-backed 'Stop WOKE' law meets appeals court block, teeing up possible Supreme Court fight

Advertisement

  • A divided federal appeals court in Florida ruled that Gov. Ron DeSantis' Stop WOKE Act restrictions on public college instruction violate the First Amendment.
  • Judge Britt Grant, a Trump appointee, wrote that Florida’s theory would give the state “total control” over professors’ classroom speech.
  • Florida can ask the full 11th Circuit to rehear the case or petition the Supreme Court for review.
    Florida's anti-woke law restricting how professors can teach about race and gender at public colleges and universities violates the First Amendment, a divided federal appeals court ruled Tuesday. It's a major blow to one of Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis' signature culture war policies.
    The
    2-1 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit keeps Florida from enforcing the higher-education provisions of the so-called Stop WOKE Act, a 2022 law DeSantis championed as part of his broader campaign against critical race theory, diversity programs and what he called "woke" ideology in schools and workplaces.
    Judge Britt Grant, an appointee of President
    Donald Trump, rejected Florida's argument that professors' classroom speech belongs to the state because they are paid by the government.
    "If the First Amendment offers any boundary of protection at all for public university classrooms, this statute crosses it," Grant
    wrote.
    The majority said the case forced the court to address a question the
    Supreme Court has left open: how much First Amendment protection public university professors have when teaching.
    "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," Grant wrote.
    The split ruling gives Florida a path to keep fighting. The three-judge panel affirmed a preliminary injunction, meaning the law remains blocked while the case continues. Florida can ask the full 11th Circuit to rehear the case or petition the
    Supreme Court to review it.
    DeSantis did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
    The law, formally called the
    Individual Freedom Act, barred instruction that "espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels" students to believe a series of concepts tied to race, sex, national origin and privilege.
    Those included ideas that a person is inherently racist or sexist because of
    race or sex, or that a person should feel guilt or psychological distress because of past actions committed by members of the same race or sex.
    Grant, joined by former President
    Bill Clinton appointee Charles Wilson, called Florida's position a "breathtaking assertion of power to ban unpopular ideas from public discourse" in public university classrooms.
    Judge
    Barbara Lagoa, another Trump appointee and a former Florida Supreme Court justice picked by DeSantis, dissented. Lagoa argued Florida acted within its authority to control what professors may endorse in state-sponsored classrooms.
    "The First Amendment protects all viewpoints in the public square, whether they are conventional or controversial," Lagoa wrote. "But it does not compel all viewpoints to be worthy of state-sponsored endorsement."
    Lagoa said the majority was wrongly limiting state authority over public university instruction.
    "This panel is not free to rewrite precedent simply because we dislike where it leads," she wrote.
    Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier praised Lagoa after the ruling, writing on X that she "may be the best jurist in our country" and "
    should be on SCOTUS."
    Tuesday's ruling is the latest court defeat for DeSantis' broader fight over schools, universities and race. The same appeals court previously blocked another part of the Stop WOKE Act that restricted workplace training.
    The latest decision came in two lawsuits brought by professors, students and a student group who argued the law amounted to unconstitutional classroom censorship. One challenge was filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, while another was brought by the ACLU, ACLU of Florida,
    Legal Defense Fund and Ballard Spahr.
    "This ruling was worth the wait. It sets a strong precedent that higher education cannot be limited to the whims of politicians," Leah Watson, senior staff attorney with the ACLU's Racial Justice Program, said in a statement.

    <small>Source: CNBC</small>

How did this make you feel?

Advertisement

Category
Business

Advertisement