Court rules that Florida professors are not mouthpieces for the government and that the \u2018Stop WOKE Act\u2019 violates the First Amendment.Ruling rejects Florida\u2019s attempt to enact a \u201cspeech ban on all public college and university professors,\u201d protects academic freedom and free inquiry on campus.Court: \u201cThe ideas Florida targets may well be noxious. Or maybe not. Either way, in this context the First Amendment trusts students to figure it out for themselves.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
ATLANTA, July 7, 2026 \u2014 Following a First Amendment lawsuit filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a federal appeals court\u00a0ruled<\/a> today that Florida\u2019s \u201cStop WOKE Act\u201d \u2014 a broad ban on what faculty at public universities may discuss in the classroom \u2014 violates the First Amendment rights of Florida university faculty and students. The ruling affirms a\u00a0previous court decision<\/a> that blocked the legislation from taking effect.<\/p>\n \u201cThough the government has plenty of ways to promote its own viewpoint, puppeteering every university professor in the state is not one of them,\u201d wrote\u00a0Judge Britt C. Grant of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in the decision. \u201cForcing an official government line\u2014in a college classroom of all places\u2014is exactly the \u2018pall of orthodoxy\u2019 that the First Amendment will not tolerate.\u201d<\/p>\n In September 2022, the FIRE\u00a0filed a lawsuit<\/a> challenging Florida\u2019s \u201cIndividual Freedom\u201d law (dubbed the \u201cStop WOKE Act\u201d by its proponents). FIRE\u2019s lawsuit \u2014\u00a0on behalf of a professor, student, and a student group \u2014 argued that the\u00a0higher education provisions<\/a>\u00a0of the\u00a0act unconstitutionally chill free expression and mandate faculty censorship on the state\u2019s college campuses. In today\u2019s ruling, a majority of the Eleventh Circuit panel agreed.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cToday\u2019s important decision means that college remains a place where professors and students are allowed to debate controversial topics \u2014 even if politicians disagree with them,\u201d said FIRE senior attorney Greg H. Greubel. \u201cToday\u2019s ruling makes clear something we\u2019ve known for a long time: Governments cannot censor their way to freedom.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The ruling by the Eleventh Circuit (which covers Florida, Alabama, and Georgia) is a crucial victory for academic freedom and free inquiry on our public campuses. The court joins the\u00a0Second<\/a>,\u00a0Fourth<\/a>,\u00a0Fifth<\/a>,\u00a0Sixth<\/a>,\u00a0Seventh<\/a>, and\u00a0Ninth<\/a> Circuits in holding that the First Amendment protects public university faculty\u2019s academic freedom when they engage in teaching and scholarship. No appellate court has come to a different conclusion.<\/p>\n \u201cAs a professor, I\u00a0shouldn\u2019t have to choose between teaching to the best of my ability or facing punishment,\u201d said Professor Adriana Novoa, who teaches Latin American history at the University of South Florida. \u201cThis decision is such a relief to professors who care about their students and want them to become well-rounded and informed. It will allow me and countless other professors to teach our classes without government interference.\u201d<\/p>\n COURTESY PHOTOS FOR MEDIA<\/a><\/p>\n The appeals court\u00a0held<\/a> that Florida\u2019s \u201cStop WOKE Act\u201d violates the First Amendment because it \u201cbars Florida\u2019s educators from promoting or endorsing\u201d disfavored ideas about \u201crace, color, sex, and national origin\u201d while allowing criticism of those same ideas. As the court explained, the law targets eight concepts, including whether a person is inherently biased based on race or sex, whether privilege or oppression is determined by race or sex, and whether virtues such as \u201cmerit, excellence, hard work, fairness, neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness\u201d are racist.<\/p>\n The court emphasized that \u201cthe First Amendment trusts students to figure it out for themselves\u201d and rejected Florida\u2019s claim that it may control professors\u2019 speech because it pays their salaries. \u201cFlorida\u2019s restrictions are, as the State admits, an attempt to force uniformity of thought on students by curtailing the free exchange of ideas in universities\u2014the very environments traditionally regarded as laboratories for expression and truth seeking,\u201d wrote Judge Grant.<\/p>\n The Eleventh Circuit\u2019s ruling means that the district court\u2019s November 2022 injunction\u00a0halting<\/a>\u00a0enforcement of key parts of the act in Florida\u2019s\u00a0public universities remains in place. In its injunction, the district court called the act \u201cpositively dystopian.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n FIRE represents Professor Novoa, former student Sam Rechek, and the First Amendment Forum student organization in the suit, with Florida attorney and FIRE Legal Network member\u00a0Gary Edinger<\/a> serving as local counsel.<\/p>\n FIRE\u2019s challenge to the Stop WOKE Act was heard alongside a related challenge filed by the ACLU, ACLU of Florida, and NAACP Legal Defense Fund.\u00a0<\/p>\n Amicus support from across the ideological spectrum included briefs from the\u00a0Academic Freedom Alliance<\/a>,\u00a0American Association of University Professors<\/a>,\u00a0Cato Institute<\/a>,\u00a0First Amendment Lawyers Association<\/a>, Profs.\u00a0Amna Khalid and Jeffrey Aaron Snyder<\/a>,\u00a0LatinoJustice<\/a>,\u00a0Learning for Justice and the Florida Freedom to Read Project<\/a>,\u00a0The New Press<\/a>,\u00a0policing scholars and organizations led by Law Enforcement Action Partnership<\/a>, the\u00a0National Education Association, United Faculty of Florida, National Black Law Students Association, Stand for Freedom<\/a>, and\u00a0PEN America<\/a>.<\/p>\n _____________________________________________________________<\/p>\n