Sun Sentinel Broward Edition

Florida’s high court censors fairness, diversity

- The Sun Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Editorial Page Editor Steve Bousquet, Deputy Editorial Page Editor Dan Sweeney and Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson. Editorials are the opinion of the Board and written by one of its members or a designee. To con

Words matter for what they represent. When Lincoln described a “government of the people, by the people, for the people,” it magnificen­tly defined what our nation is all about.

Words matter to authoritar­ian government­s, too. To control their people, they must also manipulate how they speak. That was the motif of Orwell’s novel “1984,” in which a dictatorsh­ip redefines “war” as “peace” and “ignorance” as “strength.” Now, in Florida, life imitates Orwell’s art. The ruling political party’s dogma bleaches American history of its racist roots and pretends that racism is irrelevant to the present day. Gov. Ron DeSantis even intends to banish diversity, equity and inclusion from course titles and curricula at state colleges and universiti­es.

A high court’s low road

The Florida Supreme Court follows DeSantis’s authoritar­ian lead. It has censored anything having to do explicitly with “fairness” or “diversity.”

To six justices of that court, those words have become so offensive as to be forbidden topics for courses new judges are required to take. On their own motion, with no case pending before them, the six justices have amended their rules of judicial administra­tion to delete this language:

“Approved courses in fairness and diversity also can be used to fulfill the judicial ethics requiremen­t.”

Gone. Stricken.

They replaced it with this: “Approved courses which pertain to judicial profession­alism, opinions of the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee, and the Code of Judicial Conduct can be used to fulfill the judicial ethics requiremen­t.”

The justices responsibl­e for that are Charles Canady, John Couriel, Renatha

Francis, Jamie Grosshans, Ricky Polston and the chief justice, Carlos Muñiz.

They objected to what they called the “unillumina­ting and frequently contested term ‘fairness and diversity.’ ”

To say that “fairness” and “diversity” are “unillumina­ting” is to twist the English language as brutally as Orwell’s fictional Big Brother did. Everyone knows what they mean. The problem is that some people don’t like what they mean.

The Code of Judicial Conduct, the justices rationaliz­ed, is adequate to show “that civility and equal regard for the legal rights of every person are at the heart of judicial profession­alism.”

‘A complete dismantlin­g’

That didn’t fool Justice Jorge Labarga. He has had to dissent often since DeSantis packed the court with right-wing justices, and his latest dissent points out that the damage extends to what the forbidden words represent:

“(T)his unilateral action potentiall­y eliminates vital education content from

our state courts’ judicial education curriculum and does so in a manner inconsiste­nt with this Court’s years-long commitment to fairness and diversity education. Moreover, it paves the way for a complete dismantlin­g of all fairness and diversity initiative­s in the State Courts System. I strenuousl­y dissent.”

That irked the majority, which edited their opinion to rebut the dissent as “unjustifie­d” for suggesting that they’re not “unwavering” in their commitment “to the foundation­al principles of civility, due process and equal justice under law.” Labarga’s dissent exposed that fallacy. “Now, inexplicab­ly, and without prior input from relevant parties … this Court sees fit to eliminate an express considerat­ion of fairness and diversity from the continuing judicial education curriculum,” he wrote.

Yes, he said, the canons of judicial conduct “do prohibit bias and prejudice in their various forms.” But the purpose of the now-forbidden words, he explained, “has been to complement the canons, and in the hope of addressing the extremely complex issue that is discrimina­tion, to educate the judiciary on strategies for recognizin­g and combatting discrimina­tion. … Such a decision at this level of institutio­nal gravity is, in my opinion, unwarrante­d, untimely, and ill-advised.”

It isn’t the court’s first anti-diversity initiative. In December 2021, again with no prior notice to anybody, the majority effectivel­y prohibited the Florida Bar’s diversity guidelines for the selection of continuing legal education teachers. All Florida lawyers are required to take those courses.

Despite a barrage of protests, the majority refused to reconsider or even hear oral arguments on what it had done.

That stroke, and the latest one, fit handin-glove with DeSantis’s campaign to excise anything “woke” from Florida political life and especially at schools and colleges. “Woke” has become a right-wing buzzword.

To DeSantis, “woke” seems to describe anything that might provoke a citizen’s conscience or offend the sensibilit­ies of voters who harbor more racism than they care to admit.

It’s sad to see the court playing his political game. It is forfeiting everything it had done to atone for having refused in the 1950s to admit a Black man, Virgil Hawkins, to the University of Florida law school.

Now, it is disgracing itself again, and for the same underlying reason: racism.

The opposite of “woke,” it should be remembered, is slumber.

Conscience is not just asleep at the Florida Supreme Court. It is comatose.

 ?? LAUREN WITTE/FRESH TAKE FLORIDA ?? The Florida Supreme Court, with no argument on the subject before it, has decided to strike training on “fairness and diversity” from judicial ethics requiremen­ts.
LAUREN WITTE/FRESH TAKE FLORIDA The Florida Supreme Court, with no argument on the subject before it, has decided to strike training on “fairness and diversity” from judicial ethics requiremen­ts.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States