 |
| Leroy Pernell, JD |
A legal challenge led in part by former FAMU law dean, now professor, Leroy Pernell, JD, has resulted in one of the most consequential First Amendment rulings involving higher education in recent Florida history.
In a 2-1 decision issued Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that key provisions of Gov. Ron DeSantis' Stop WOKE Act governing public colleges and universities likely violate the First Amendment, affirming a lower court's injunction that has prevented the law from being enforced while the litigation continues.
The case places Pernell at the center of a landmark constitutional dispute over academic freedom. Pernell serves as the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, arguing that the law unlawfully restricts what professors can teach and discuss in university classrooms.
The appellate court agreed.
Writing for the majority, Judge Britt Grant rejected Florida's argument that the state has broad authority to dictate the viewpoints professors may express simply because they are state employees. Instead, the court concluded that the law amounts to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination, warning that the state's position represented "a breathtaking assertion of power" over speech in public university classrooms.
The ruling marks a significant victory not only for Pernell but also for faculty members and students across Florida's public university system, where the law had sought to limit classroom instruction surrounding race, gender and other subjects the Legislature identified as controversial.
The challenged provisions are part of the Individual Freedom Act, more commonly known as the Stop WOKE Act, a signature initiative championed by DeSantis and approved by the Florida Legislature in 2022. Among other restrictions, the law prohibited university instructors from endorsing certain concepts related to race, sex and national origin while teaching courses at public institutions.
Pernell and fellow plaintiffs contended that the measure imposed unconstitutional limits on classroom discussion and undermined the role of universities as places of open inquiry.
Following the ruling, Pernell said the decision protects students' ability to engage with difficult subjects without political interference.
"We are thrilled the court has stopped the erasure of topics that have real implications for our students," Pernell said in a statement, adding that the ruling allows students to "learn, discuss, and develop tools for combatting the complex issue of racism in our country without being gagged by those who would dictate that only state-approved thought may be promoted."
The majority opinion also emphasized the unique role of higher education, distinguishing university classrooms from other government workplaces. While acknowledging the state's authority to establish curricula, the court concluded that such authority does not extend to banning particular viewpoints professors may express during classroom instruction.
The decision affirms a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Mark Walker in 2022, meaning the higher education provisions of the law will remain unenforceable as the case proceeds. Florida officials may seek further review, including a possible appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
For FAMU, the ruling highlights the national influence of one of its most distinguished legal scholars.
Pernell, is credited with leading FAMU law school to full accreditation from the American Bar Association in 2009 and reaccreditation in 2014. He is also professor emeritus and former dean of the Northern Illinois University College of Law. He has spent decades teaching constitutional law, civil rights and property law. His role as lead plaintiff places FAMU at the center of a case that could shape the constitutional boundaries of academic freedom for public colleges and universities nationwide.
Although the litigation is not yet over, Tuesday's ruling represents a significant legal setback for one of the DeSantis administration's most prominent education policies and reinforces longstanding judicial recognition that public university classrooms occupy a special place in First Amendment jurisprudence.