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
© 2025 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
- 1South Florida Attorney Charged With Aggravated Battery After Incident in Prime Rib Line
- 2'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 3Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 4‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 5State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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