A federal judge has issued a permanent injunction against a key provision of Florida’s “Stop WOKE Act” that restricts private employers from holding mandatory employee training sessions that promote certain beliefs dealing with race, color, sex or national origin.
Judge Mark Walker of the Northern District of Florida issued the order that converted a preliminary injunction into a permanent injunction against House Bill 7, titled the “Stop Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees Act.” The measure contained a provision banning employers from holding meetings that promote a certain set of beliefs, including the idea that an individual must feel guilt or emotional distress due to acts committed in the past by members of the same “race, color, sex or national origin.”
Walker’s July 26 order comes in the wake of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals earlier this year affirming Walker’s approval of a preliminary injunction against the private employer provision.
“Defendants do not oppose plaintiffs’ motion for entry of a statewide permanent injunction in light of the 11th Circuit’s ruling affirming the preliminary injunction,” Walker said in his order.
That order also included a judgment stating that the provision of HB 7 in question violates free speech rights under the First and 14th Amendments.
“Defendants, except for Governor (Ron) DeSantis, are hereby permanently enjoined from implementing, operating or enforcing Section 760.10(8),” the order states. “This injunction is binding on those defendants in their official capacities, as well as on their successors, officers, agents, servants, employees and attorneys, and on those persons in active concert or participation with them.”
Shalini Goel Agarwal, special counsel for Project Democracy, the group that represented plaintiffs in the litigation, said the order means that the law cannot be enforced against anyone in the state of Florida.
“We are very pleased the court converted the preliminary injunction to a permanent injunction because it makes clear there are certain First Amendment principles that can’t be crossed just because politicians want to punish particular speech (subjects),” Agarwal told the Florida Record.
Similar speech codes are contained in Project 2025, the policy document put together by the Heritage Foundation, former Trump administration officials and current Republican National Committee officials, she said.
“(The July 26) decision serves as a powerful reminder that the First Amendment cannot be warped to serve the interests of elected officials,” Agarwal said in a prepared statement. “Censoring business owners from speaking in favor of subjects that politicians don’t like is a move ripped straight from the authoritarian playbook. …”
In their arguments in the litigation, Florida officials said the law actually restricts conduct rather than speech.
“We cannot agree, and we reject this latest attempt to control speech by recharacterizing it as conduct,” the 11th Circuit said in its March 4 opinion. “Florida may be exactly right about the nature of the ideas it targets. Or it may not. Either way, the merits of these views will be decided in the clanging marketplace of ideas rather than a codebook or a courtroom.”
The only things left to do in the litigation involve motions for collecting reasonable attorney fees, according to Walker’s order. Other provisions of the measure are being challenged in a separate lawsuit.