TALLAHASSEE — A group of professors from the University of Florida, Florida State University, and Florida International University has filed a lawsuit against a 2023 law that they claim violates their First Amendment rights. The law targets diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in universities.
The professors are asking the court to block parts of the law, particularly one that stops public funding for programs promoting DEI and another that bans general-education courses teaching “identity politics” or concepts like systemic racism and privilege.
This law is part of a broader effort led by Governor Ron DeSantis and other state officials to roll back DEI programs across Florida.
According to the lawsuit, losing funding for certain courses reduces enrollment and risks course cancellation. Political science professor Sharon Austin has faced this issue; her courses on race have lost their general-education status. The lawsuit argues that this change harms students’ educational opportunities and restricts professors’ ability to teach freely.
In response, lawyers for the state’s Board of Governors and university trustees argued that professors can still teach their courses as electives or upper-level classes. They emphasized that professors can continue using existing syllabi and course materials.
The plaintiffs also claim that the funding restrictions have negative impacts on their research opportunities. For instance, Professor Austin was denied funding to present at an academic conference. They argue that the government should not deny funding based on a professor’s viewpoint.
However, state attorneys contend that the law does not restrict speech directly and that professors can still present at conferences using their own funding if necessary. They assert that the funding ban is designed to prevent taxpayer money from supporting DEI initiatives that may be seen as politically controversial.
The plaintiffs argue that the law censors discussions about race and identity, which they believe is essential for academic freedom. They claim this undermines the core values of higher education.
On the other hand, state lawyers maintain that the law simply establishes guidelines for how public universities should operate and allocate funding, keeping those discussions separate from individual teaching capabilities.
A hearing for the preliminary injunction is set for March 31, where the court will consider the arguments presented by both sides.
