Florida Judge Says Gov. Ron DeSantis’ ‘Stop Woke’ Law Is Unconstitutional

If you thought the orange mon­ster was the only men­ace to democ­ra­cy, think again. Developing in the sew­er swamps of Florida’s ran­cid lagoons is anoth­er wannabe author­i­tar­i­an who has done every­thing in his pow­er to turn back the clock to the 1920s in his state.
He is a bul­ly and a big­ot who hates crit­i­cal race the­o­ry and gets indig­nant that chil­dren are taught the true his­to­ry of America, not the watered-down ver­sion of what hap­pened to black peo­ple here.

»»»»

A Florida judge on Thursday declared a Florida law cham­pi­oned by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis that restricts race-based con­ver­sa­tion and analy­sis in busi­ness and edu­ca­tion unconstitutional.
Tallahassee U.S. District Judge Mark Walker said in a 44-page rul­ing that the “Stop WOKE” act vio­lates the First Amendment and is imper­mis­si­bly vague. Walker also refused to issue a stay that would keep the law in effect dur­ing any appeal by the state.

The law tar­gets what DeSantis has called a “per­ni­cious” ide­ol­o­gy exem­pli­fied by crit­i­cal race the­o­ry — the idea that racism is sys­temic in U.S. insti­tu­tions that serve to per­pet­u­ate white dom­i­nance in society.

Walker said the law, as applied to diver­si­ty, inclu­sion and bias train­ing in busi­ness­es, turns the First Amendment “upside down” because the state is bar­ring speech by pro­hibit­ing dis­cus­sion of cer­tain con­cepts in train­ing programs.

If Florida tru­ly believes we live in a post-racial soci­ety, then let it make its case,” the judge wrote. “But it can­not win the argu­ment by muz­zling its opponents.”

The governor’s office did not imme­di­ate­ly respond to an email seek­ing com­ment. DeSantis has repeat­ed­ly said any loss­es at the low­er court lev­el on his pri­or­i­ties are like­ly to be reversed by appeals courts that are gen­er­al­ly more conservative.

The law pro­hibits teach­ing or busi­ness prac­tices that con­tend mem­bers of one eth­nic group are inher­ent­ly racist and should feel guilt for past actions com­mit­ted by oth­ers. It also bars the notion that a person’s sta­tus as priv­i­leged or oppressed is nec­es­sar­i­ly deter­mined by their race or gen­der, or that dis­crim­i­na­tion is accept­able to achieve diversity.

The rul­ing Thursday came in one of three law­suits chal­leng­ing the Stop Woke act. It was filed by pri­vate enti­ties, Clearwater-based Honeyfund​.com and oth­ers, claim­ing their free speech rights are cur­tailed because the law infringes on com­pa­ny train­ing pro­grams stress­ing diver­si­ty, inclu­sion, elim­i­na­tion of bias and pre­ven­tion of work­place harass­ment. Companies with 15 or more employ­ees could face civ­il law­suits over such practices.

That law­suit says Honeyfund seeks to pro­tect the rights of pri­vate employ­ers to “engage in open and free exchange of infor­ma­tion with employ­ees to iden­ti­fy and begin to address dis­crim­i­na­tion and harm” in their organizations.

Another law­suit, which was filed Thursday by col­lege pro­fes­sors and stu­dents, claims the law amounts to “racial­ly moti­vat­ed cen­sor­ship” that will act to “sti­fle wide­spread demands to dis­cuss, study and address sys­temic inequal­i­ties” under­scored by the nation­al dis­cus­sion of race after the killing of George Floyd, who was Black, by Minneapolis police in May 2020.

In place of free and open aca­d­e­m­ic inquiry and debate, instruc­tors fear dis­cussing top­ics of oppres­sion, priv­i­lege, and race and gen­der inequal­i­ties with which the Legislature dis­agrees,” the law­suit says. “As a result, stu­dents are either denied access to knowl­edge alto­geth­er or instruc­tors are forced to present incom­plete or inac­cu­rate infor­ma­tion that is steered toward the Legislature’s own views.”

Conservatives see crit­i­cal race the­o­ry less as aca­d­e­m­ic inquiry into truth and his­to­ry and more as the impo­si­tion of a divi­sive ide­ol­o­gy stem­ming from Marxism that assigns peo­ple into the cat­e­gories of oppres­sor and oppressed based on their race.

Like the pro­fes­sors, a group of K‑12 teach­ers and a stu­dent claim in a third pend­ing law­suit that the law vio­lates the Constitution’s pro­tec­tions of free expres­sion, aca­d­e­m­ic free­dom and access to infor­ma­tion in pub­lic schools.

The Stop WOKE Act aims to for­ward the government’s pre­ferred nar­ra­tive of his­to­ry and soci­ety and to ren­der ille­gal speech that chal­lenges that nar­ra­tive,” the law­suit says.

DeSantis is run­ning for reelec­tion as gov­er­nor this year and is wide­ly viewed as a con­tender for the 2024 GOP pres­i­den­tial nom­i­na­tion. He has made cul­tur­al issues a cor­ner­stone of his admin­is­tra­tion, par­tic­u­lar­ly snuff­ing out what he calls “woke” enti­ties and philoso­phies cen­tered on issues of dis­crim­i­na­tion involv­ing race, gen­der and sex­u­al orientation.

What you see now with the rise of this woke ide­ol­o­gy is an attempt to real­ly dele­git­imize our his­to­ry and to dele­git­imize our insti­tu­tions, and I view the wok­e­ness as a form of cul­tur­al Marxism,” DeSantis said in a December 2021 speech. “They real­ly want to tear at the fab­ric of our society.”

Another exam­ple of this is DeSantis’ effort to pun­ish Walt Disney World for the company’s oppo­si­tion to the Parental Rights in Education law, labeled by crit­ics as the “Don’t Say Gay” law because it lim­its gen­der ori­en­ta­tion instruc­tion in ear­ly grades and chills dis­cus­sion of the issue over­all in schools.

The gov­er­nor pushed the Legislature to end Disney World’s spe­cial inde­pen­dent dis­trict that essen­tial­ly enabled it to run its own pri­vate gov­ern­ment. That law doesn’t take full effect until June 2023 but has already been chal­lenged in court.

Other law­suits have chal­lenged DeSantis pri­or­i­ties such as a ban on abor­tion after 15 weeks, a mea­sure to fine tech com­pa­nies if they “de-plat­form” polit­i­cal can­di­dates over their view­points, an “anti-riot” law enact­ing new felonies after Black Lives Matter protests and a law plac­ing new restric­tions on elections.