"First Amendment sin": Trump-appointed judge torches Florida's "Stop Woke" law

Banning speech on political topics is "bad," banning speech based on political viewpoints is "worse," court rules

By Tatyana Tandanpolie

Staff Writer

Published March 5, 2024 10:23AM (EST)

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis speaks during a news conference on February 05, 2024 in Miami Beach, Florida. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis speaks during a news conference on February 05, 2024 in Miami Beach, Florida. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

A federal appeals court on Monday blocked Florida from enforcing a Gov. Ron DeSantis-backed law that limits how private companies approach workplace diversity and inclusion, The Washington Post reports.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit upheld a federal judge's August 2022 ruling, determining that the "Stop Woke Act" "exceeds the bounds" of the Constitution's First Amendment right to free speech and expression in its effort to stipulate workplace trainings on race, sex and national origin. 

“By limiting its restrictions to a list of ideas designated as offensive, the Act targets speech based on its content," Judge Britt C. Grant wrote in the 22-page ruling. "And by barring only speech that endorses any of those ideas, it penalizes certain viewpoints — the greatest First Amendment sin."

Florida's Republican-controlled legislature approved the "Stop Woke Act" in March 2022. It was both one of DeSantis' top priorities and a key talking point on the campaign trail before he suspended his presidential bid earlier this year. The legislation bans workplace, public school and university trainings that could spur feelings of shame or guilt about historic actions undertaken by their race or sex, with any breach amounting to a violation of state anti-discrimination laws.

DeSantis had previously framed the "Stop Woke Act" as a means for employees to "stand up against discrimination." In court, he and state attorneys argued that the measure is a prohibition on conduct — requiring employees to attend such trainings — not speech, the opinion noted. But Grant, a Trump appointee, rejected that claim.

“Florida’s attempts to repackage its Act as a regulation of conduct rather than speech do not work,” Grant wrote. “ … Even if we presumed that the act served the interest of combating discrimination in some way, its breadth and scope would doom it. Banning speech on a wide variety of political topics is bad; banning speech on a wide variety of political viewpoints is worse.”