Skip to main content
Academic FreedomLegal Precedent· 4 min read· in Education

Federal Appeals Court Strikes Down Florida's 'Stop Woke Act' in Higher Education

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Florida cannot restrict university professors from discussing race and gender, declaring the state's 'salary-for-speech' argument a violation of the First Amendment.

By Juliette Monroe

Academic Freedom Advocates 65%State Authority Proponents 35%
Academic Freedom Advocates
Argue that universities must remain centers of free inquiry where students can debate controversial ideas without government censorship.
State Authority Proponents
Argue that because professors are state employees, the government has the right to dictate the curriculum and prevent taxpayer-funded endorsement of concepts they view as discriminatory.

Perspectives this story doesn't cover

  • K-12 educators still operating under the law
  • Current Florida university students

On July 7, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit struck down the higher education provisions of Florida's "Stop WOKE Act," delivering a landmark victory for academic freedom and First Amendment rights on public university campuses.[1]

The 2-1 decision decisively rejected the state's argument that it could control the speech of public university professors simply because they are government employees.

Writing for the majority, Judge Britt C. Grant—an appointee of President Donald Trump—called Florida's position a "breathtaking assertion of power to ban unpopular ideas from public discourse."

The ruling ensures that Florida's public colleges and universities will remain environments where complex, controversial, and challenging ideas can be debated freely, without the "pall of orthodoxy" mandated by state politicians.[1]

The eight concepts the 2022 law attempted to ban from higher education instruction.

Passed in 2022 and championed by Governor Ron DeSantis, the Individual Freedom Act sought to prohibit instruction that "espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels" belief in eight specific concepts related to race, sex, and national origin.[2][3]

These targeted concepts included the idea that an individual is inherently racist or sexist by virtue of their race or sex, or that a person bears responsibility for historical actions committed by members of their same demographic group.[2][3]

The state argued that the law was necessary to prevent "indoctrination" and protect students from feeling psychological distress or guilt over historical injustices.[2]

However, the appellate court dismantled this rationale, emphasizing that higher education is fundamentally designed to expose adult students to a wide spectrum of thought. "The ideas Florida targets may well be noxious. Or maybe not," Judge Grant wrote. "Either way, in this context the First Amendment trusts students to figure it out for themselves."[1]

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta, Georgia.

The legal battle began when the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed lawsuits in 2022 on behalf of professors and students, arguing the law was unconstitutionally vague and discriminatory.[1]

A federal district court initially blocked the higher education provisions in late 2022, a preliminary injunction that Tuesday's appellate ruling has now affirmed and cemented.

The state's core legal defense relied on the "government speech" doctrine, asserting that because professors are paid by the state, their classroom instruction is effectively the state's speech, which the government can regulate at will.

The 11th Circuit firmly rejected this "salary-for-speech" rule. The majority noted that applying such total control would destroy the traditional constitutional protections for academic freedom that are essential to a functioning university system.

The core legal dispute centered on whether a professor's lecture constitutes government speech.

Judge Barbara Lagoa, another Trump appointee, issued a dissenting opinion arguing that while the First Amendment protects viewpoints in the public square, it "does not compel all viewpoints to be worthy of state-sponsored endorsement."[3]

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier immediately praised Lagoa's dissent, suggesting her deference to state legislative power over public institutions makes her a model jurist who belongs on the Supreme Court.

Despite the dissent, civil rights advocates celebrated the majority's decision as a crucial firewall against a growing national trend. Since the Stop WOKE Act was introduced, more than 30 other states have proposed similar legislation attempting to restrict higher education curricula.

"This ruling sets a strong precedent that higher education cannot be limited to the whims of politicians," said Leah Watson, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU's Racial Justice Program.

Educators celebrated the ruling as a vital protection of their right to determine course curriculum.

Educators echoed this relief. Robert Cassanello, President of the United Faculty of Florida, emphasized that professors are content experts who have a constitutional right to determine their curriculum without being compelled to repeat state-drafted political speech.

What remains uncertain is the fate of K-12 education. While the higher education and workplace training provisions of the Stop WOKE Act have now both been struck down by the 11th Circuit, the law's restrictions on K-12 public school classrooms remain in effect.

Legal experts suggest that Tuesday's sweeping defense of free inquiry in higher education could provide a new framework for future challenges to K-12 censorship, though courts traditionally grant states more leeway over curriculum for minors.

For now, the ruling guarantees that Florida's university students will return to campuses this fall where the exchange of ideas—however difficult or controversial—remains protected by the highest laws of the land.[1]

Key points

  1. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the higher education provisions of Florida's Stop WOKE Act in a 2-1 decision.
  2. The court ruled that the state cannot dictate university curricula or ban unpopular ideas from classroom discussions.
  3. Judges rejected Florida's argument that professors' lectures constitute 'government speech' subject to legislative control.
  4. The ruling is a major victory for First Amendment rights and sets a precedent against similar classroom censorship bills nationwide.
  5. The law's restrictions on K-12 public school classrooms remain in effect, as this ruling only applied to higher education.

Key terms

Stop WOKE Act
A 2022 Florida law that restricted how race, gender, and systemic inequality could be taught in schools or discussed in workplace trainings.
First Amendment
The U.S. Constitutional amendment protecting freedom of speech, which the court ruled prevents the state from censoring university classroom debates.
11th Circuit Court of Appeals
The federal appellate court with jurisdiction over federal cases originating in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia.
Government Speech Doctrine
A legal principle asserting that the government can regulate its own speech, which Florida unsuccessfully argued should apply to university professors' lectures.

Sources

Source coverage

3 outlets

2 viewpoints surfaced

Academic Freedom Advocates 65%State Authority Proponents 35%
  1. [1]FIREAcademic Freedom Advocates

    VICTORY: Federal appeals court decisively rejects Florida's 'Stop WOKE Act'

    Read on FIRE
  2. [2]News From The StatesAcademic Freedom Advocates

    Instead of the state determining what will be taught in university classrooms, students must be free to hear ideas

    Read on News From The States
  3. [3]Miami HeraldState Authority Proponents

    Federal court blocks part of Florida law restricting college instruction

    Read on Miami Herald

Comments

Stay informed

Every angle. Every day.

Get Education stories with full source coverage and perspective breakdowns delivered to your inbox.