Alleging that numerous courses and topics will be prohibited or "severely curtailed" by a new state law, a group that opposes Gov. Ron DeSantis' efforts to remake New College of Florida filed a federal lawsuit Monday challenging the measure.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit include the group NCF Freedom, Inc. and New College professors and students. The legal challenge asked a judge to block the state from enforcing the 2023 law and to declare that the measure is unconstitutional.
The legal challenge argued that DeSantis and Republican state lawmakers, who control the House and Senate, have "adopted as state policy the goal of prohibiting the dissemination of certain ideas," through a series of measures over the past few years.
"The state of Florida leads the country in efforts to censor academic freedom and instruction in its college classrooms," the lawsuit said.
Defendants in the lawsuit are state Education Commissioner Manny Diaz Jr., members of the state university system's Board of Governors, members of the New College Board of Trustees and New College Interim President Richard Corcoran.
According to NCF Freedom's website, the group was formed in an effort to "improve New College in a manner that avoids unethical, improper or illegal actions by the State, the Board of Governors, the Board of Trustees, or the Administration that will harm the mission and future of New College."
The legal challenge, filed in the Northern District of Florida, focused largely on a part of the law (SB 266) that sets strict prohibitions on instruction of certain topics in "general education core courses" at state colleges and universities.
The law, in part, requires that such courses "may not distort significant historical events," include curriculum that teaches "identity politics," or violate a state law that restricts the way certain race-related topics can be taught in schools.
The law also prohibits curriculum that is "based on theories that systemic racism, sexism, oppression, and privilege are inherent in the institutions of the United States and were created to maintain social, political, and economic inequities."
Restrictions in the 2023 law would strip away numerous course offerings from New College students, plaintiffs argued Monday.
"There are a host of programs, majors, courses and textbooks/assignments at New College which are either directly prohibited by SB 266 or which will be severely curtailed, censored and limited by that law," the lawsuit said.
The lawsuit listed a number of the programs and courses that would be on the chopping block.
Classes such as "Queer History: Sexuality in the 20th Century United States," "Queer Studies," "Race, Gender and Sexuality," "Sociology of Gender and the Body," and "Topics in Feminist Philosophy," would likely "be prohibited outright, or at risk of being chilled" by the law, the plaintiffs' attorneys argued.
The New College Board of Trustees last week voted to begin a process that would eliminate the school's gender studies program, with the student and faculty members of the trustees voting against the plan.
New College has drawn heavy attention amid efforts by leadership at the school — which was revamped by DeSantis in January through a slew of conservative appointees to the trustees board — to make sweeping changes. Since the governor's appointments, the board has removed former New College president Patricia Okker and replaced her on an interim basis with Corcoran, a former state House speaker and state education commissioner. DeSantis has made education one of the pillars of his 2024 run for president.
With Corcoran at the helm, the New College trustees also eliminated an on-campus office that handled issues related to diversity, equity and inclusion.
The lawsuit filed Monday also pointed to other programs and course offerings that plaintiffs said would be jeopardized by the law. For example, the complaint alleged that a "student majoring in Art History is apparently encouraged to evaluate the most off-limits of all subjects — 'critical race theory.'" Critical race theory is based on the concept that racism is embedded in American institutions.
A concentration in art history includes an emphasis on "theory and method course that introduces students to a variety of critical frameworks," such as "social history, semiotics, feminist and gender theory, critical race and post-colonial theory, and globalization," the lawsuit said.
Courses in philosophy, sociology, anthropology, urban studies and English also could violate the law, the plaintiffs' lawyers argued.
"The elimination or curtailment of many AOCs (areas of concentration) or majors directly affects the rights of current and future faculty and students, including the plaintiffs bringing this action. Faculty and students at colleges and universities throughout Florida face the same censorship and the same injury to their rights of free speech and academic inquiry," the 81-page lawsuit said.
The 2023 law restricts speech "in two separate but complementary" ways, the plaintiffs argued.
"It directly censors the teaching of the disfavored topics by prohibiting them outright," and "denies funding to institutions which offer courses that address or include the prohibited topics," lawyers for the plaintiffs argued.
Under the 2023 measure, schools that offer courses that do not comply with those parts of the law would not be eligible to receive what is known as performance-based funding. Such funding can total tens of millions of dollars for some universities.
Meanwhile, the law also is the subject of a separate legal challenge filed earlier this month in Leon County circuit court by faculty unions and a New College professor who was denied tenure.
That lawsuit challenges a part of the law that did away with arbitration in university employment disputes. The plaintiffs, including New College professor Hugo Viera-Vargas, argued that the law violates collective-bargaining rights and unconstitutionally "impairs" an existing union contract.
Ryan Dailey reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow Uncertainty in College Athletics Compensation Could Drive Lawsuits in 2025
St. Thomas University Settles With Fired Professor Who Had Alleged Academic Freedom Violations and Discrimination
9 minute readEx-St. Thomas Univ. Law Professor Sues School Over Firing, Alleging Defamation
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250