THE PASSING of Florida House Bill 1557, officially labeled The Parental Rights in Education Bill, has made international headlines for preventing the discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in schools. The dangers the bill poses to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, plus (LGBTQ+) individuals as well as the larger student population have sparked severe backlash and conflicting opinions. The Florida Senate passed the bill on March 8, and Governor Ron DeSantis officially signed it on March 28[1]. Intense and prevalent criticism of the bill has raised serious questions about its implementation, the restriction of content taught in schools, and parents’ rights regarding their children’s education.

Florida House Bill 1557

   Florida House Bill 1557 was supposedly created to protect the rights of parents and establish a secure learning environment for students. It was introduced by State Representative Joe Harding, who stated in an interview with TIME magazine that the main purpose of the bill is to empower parents and allow them to be “kept in the know and involved on what’s going on” regarding their child’s education. In other words, the bill enables parents to have knowledge of and a degree of control in the discourse their child is exposed to in schools, especially concerning sexual orientation and gender identity. The Florida Family Policy Council—a conservative group—expressed support for the bill, claiming that it is “necessary because government schools[2] in the United States have become ideological, political and are more interested in shaping a child’s politics and sexual inclinations than they are in teaching academics of reading, writing, math, and education[3].”

   The bill is part of a larger movement in the U.S. to allow parents to have more of a voice in their children’s education in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic[4]. In addition to parents’ showdown against schools over the opening of schools and mask mandates, the temporary hiatus students took due to lockdown policies has allowed parents to take a closer look into what their children are being taught. The acute awareness of the school curricula incited some parents’ discomfort about the discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity at school. The American Principles Project, one of the many conservative groups actively supporting the influence of parents inside the classroom, stated that a “parent’s rights to raise their children and instill values in them are being taken away,” using the mask and vaccine mandates and discussion of sexual orientation as examples[4].

Why is the bill receiving backlash?

   LGBTQ+ activists and critics of the bill have argued that its vague wording can lead to abuse of the power provided by the bill and inhibit free discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in classroom environments. Lines 97 to 101 of the bill state that “classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate.” “Classroom instruction” is an ambiguous term that can range from something as simple as the mention of a queer individual to an entire lesson dedicated to a novel that includes a non-cisgender character. This implication is what inspired the bill’s nickname, “Don’t Say Gay,” as the vague term could outright ban the discussion of even just slight LGBTQ+ themes[1]. Although the bill specifies that it is only applicable to kindergarten and the first three grades, the phrase “in a manner that is not age-appropriate” is open to subjective interpretation, possibly extending the legislation’s impact to older students. Critics argue that the bill’s potential to eliminate discussion of LGBTQ+ themes can exacerbate stigma against sexual minorities and the feelings of isolation they most likely already suffer from[5].

   Furthermore, the bill also makes it a requirement for the school to report to parents if “there is a change in the student’s services or monitoring related to mental, emotional, or physical health….” Schools are meant to establish a safe environment for students where they can feel comfortable enough to reach out for help. Those opposing the bill claim that this requirement of the bill would discourage students experiencing mental or emotional hardship from reaching out to teachers or counselors[5]. The bill also gives parents the power to directly sue the school if they believe the school to have violated the vaguely written bill. Teachers would be forced to take precautions due to fear of parents or students taking them to court or—worst-case scenario—losing their jobs or teaching licenses[6].

An uncertain future

   The passing of the bill through the Florida Senate invoked widespread protests all over the United States in opposition to the signing of the bill into law. School students from Floridian cities like Tampa, Orlando, Tallahassee, and others staged walkouts to protest the bill[7]. The public also urged various corporations to speak out against the passing of the legislation. Disney CEO Bob Chapek was initially hesitant to speak out, stating that corporate statements “do very little to change outcomes or minds,” but after facing immense criticism from employees and the public, Disney released an official statement condemning the legislation[3]. More than 150 other companies—including Apple, Microsoft, and Hilton—signed a Human Rights Campaign letter opposing Florida House Bill 1557 and anti-LGBTQ+ legislations in general[8]. President Joe Biden also openly criticized the bill, calling it a “hateful bill[3].”

   Despite the backlash, many have voiced support for the bill, arguing that the media is twisting the intentions of the bill. State Senator Keli Stargel stated that the “bill is not intended to hurt students,” but to “strengthen the family[9].” Those in favor of the legislation have argued that conversations about gender identity at a young age are unnecessary. Some members of local communities in Florida are also in agreement. Renee Chiea, an advocate from Moms for Liberty, stated: “it’s outrageous for someone to try and talk to my young child about things that aren’t concerning them…[10].”

   Despite these conflicting opinions, in an interview with The Yonsei Annals, Scott Howell (Prof., Justice & Civil Leadership) voiced doubt about the extent to which the bill could be enforced, if at all. Due to the bill’s vague language, “any topic discussed in the classroom can be colorably characterized as touching on issues of sexual orientation and gender identity.” Howell further remarked that “the Constitution is very suspicious of vague laws,” concluding that the “impracticality and the likely unconstitutionality of the law will be its downfall.”

*                 *                 *

   Although Governor DeSantis has officially signed the bill, the conflict is far from over. Within days of the signing, LGBTQ+ advocates sued Governor DeSantis to block the enforcement of the law[9]. As Howell expressed, the enactment and legality of Florida House Bill 1557 will serve both as a test case and model for other states, “to see which parts of the law, if any, can stand up to Constitutional scrutiny.” Regardless of its implementation, the bill remains a heavily contested piece of legislation, a physical embodiment of the incendiary political differences in U.S. society.

[1] The New York Times

[2] Government schools: Government-funded schools that provide education free of charge to pupils; They are also commonly referred to as public schools.

[3] BBC

[4] The Hill

[5] TIME

[6] The Washington Post

[7] NBC News

[8] Human Rights Campaign

[9] ABC News

[10] ABC Action News