Skip to main content

Florida Stop WOKE Act (2022)

  • Law: Florida House Bill 7 — "Individual Freedom Act," commonly called the Stop WOKE Act
  • Passed: Florida Legislature, February 2022
  • Signed by: Governor Ron DeSantis, April 22, 2022
  • Vote: House 76–40; Senate 24–15
  • Status: Partially blocked; several provisions enjoined by federal courts

What It Does​

The Stop WOKE Act (the acronym stands for "Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees") restricts what can be taught in Florida workplaces, universities, and K–12 schools regarding race, gender, and related topics.

Workplace provisions:

  • Prohibits employers from requiring employees to attend training or instruction that presents any of eight enumerated concepts as fact. Prohibited concepts include:
    • That members of one race, color, sex, or national origin are inherently morally superior or inferior.
    • That a person, by virtue of their race, color, sex, or national origin, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive.
    • That a person should feel guilt, anguish, or psychological distress because of their race, color, sex, or national origin.
    • That merit, work ethic, or objective standards are racist or sexist concepts.
  • Employees may file civil complaints; businesses face FCHR (Florida Commission on Human Relations) enforcement actions.

Higher education provisions:

  • Bars Florida public universities from teaching, promoting, or advancing certain DEI-related concepts in ways students would feel "compelled" to believe.
  • Restricts how certain topics in race and gender may be presented in coursework.

K–12 provisions:

  • Limits classroom instruction on race, sex, and related topics; prohibits teaching that students should feel personal responsibility for past actions by members of their racial or gender group.

Why Critics Oppose It​

  • Government dictating academic content — The law does not merely prohibit harassment or compelled speech; it tells employers and universities what substantive viewpoints they may not present or discuss, in violation of the First Amendment.
  • Vague enumerated concepts — The eight prohibited concepts are written at a level of abstraction that makes it impossible for employers or professors to know which training materials or course content crosses the line — creating a chilling effect far beyond any specific prohibited act.
  • Compelled silence — A professor who believes, for example, that structural racism is a real and ongoing phenomenon may be legally prohibited from presenting that view in certain instructional contexts, regardless of academic evidence.
  • Unequal application — The law prohibits training that makes employees of one race feel guilt or discomfort but does not equally prohibit training that makes members of any group feel uncomfortable — critics argue this is itself a viewpoint-discriminatory scheme.
  • Asymmetric enforcement — The private right of action structure gives ideologically motivated complaints a legal weapon to disrupt workplace training programs with which they disagree.

Constitutional Concerns​

  • 1st Amendment (freedom of speech) — The workplace provisions restrict what private employers can say to their own employees in training sessions.
  • 1st Amendment (academic freedom / compelled silence) — The university provisions restrict faculty speech based on viewpoint.
  • 1st Amendment (viewpoint discrimination) — A law that prohibits one side of an ideological debate but not the other is viewpoint-discriminatory and presumptively unconstitutional under R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul and its progeny.
  • 14th Amendment (due process / vagueness) — The enumerated concepts are too vague to give fair notice of what conduct is prohibited.
  • Workplace provisions: In Honeyfund.com v. DeSantis (N.D. Fla. 2022), a federal district court enjoined the workplace provisions, calling the law "positively dystopian" and finding it constituted viewpoint discrimination. The 11th Circuit affirmed the injunction in 2023. Florida petitioned SCOTUS; the case is ongoing.
  • University provisions: In Pernell v. Florida Board of Governors (N.D. Fla. 2022), a district court enjoined the higher education provisions on First Amendment grounds. The 11th Circuit affirmed in part; litigation continues.
  • As of 2025, the K–12 provisions have not been fully adjudicated at the appellate level.

Key Votes to Screen​

Florida legislators who voted YES on HB 7 voted for a law that federal courts have found unconstitutionally restricts what private employers and public universities may say about race and gender. House: 76–40; Senate: 24–15.

Why This Matters for We The Citizens​

The Stop WOKE Act is the leading example of state governments using civil rights enforcement machinery to suppress one side of a political debate about history and social structure. It represents a new form of government speech control — not banning words, but dictating permissible viewpoints in the workplace and classroom.

See also: Florida HB 1 Anti-Riot Act | State Bad Laws Overview

Last updated on