TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — What was supposed to be a routine update to Florida’s annual farm bill erupted into a First Amendment battle this week, forcing lawmakers to strip out a controversial provision critics said could have silenced public debate over food and farming.
The dispute centered on language that would have expanded Florida’s agricultural disparagement law (section 48), making it easier to sue over criticism of farming or agricultural practices—not just specific food products. Supporters argued the change would protect farmers from knowingly false and malicious attacks that harm their livelihoods.
“Think about this— farmers go to work every day with one thing in mind, what they have to do to grow the produce, or cattle, raise the cattle, or whatever it is they're doing,” said Sen. Keith Truenow, R-Clermont. “They wear a lot of hats, you know, going to court is not one of them they want to wear.”
WATCH: Florida farm bill sparks free speech fight, lawmakers strip controversial provision
But environmental organizations, free-speech advocates, and a growing group of Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) influencers warned the proposal lowered the legal bar from defamation to “disparagement,” potentially exposing critics to costly lawsuits for raising concerns about pesticides, food safety, or farming practices.
“This was not MAHA, just to be clear, this was muzzling MAHA. It shouldn't happen in the Free State of Florida,” one speaker told lawmakers during committee testimony.
The backlash spilled beyond the Capitol, fueling viral social media posts and drawing crowds to committee hearings. Among them was Daniel Andrews, founder of Captains for Clean Water, who said the provision threatened the ability of everyday Floridians to speak openly.
“I’m of utmost concern with what's in our food supply, and I want the ability, just as an American citizen, to be able to speak up,” Andrews said.
After hours of testimony, Senate lawmakers voted to remove the disparagement language entirely, easing immediate concerns about a chilling effect on free speech. The bill now heads to the full Senate for a floor vote, though legislative leaders say the issue may not be settled.
When asked for his thoughts on the removal of the controversial language, Senate President Ben Albritton offered only this:
“I would say the ag bill is a work in progress,” Albritton said.
A House amendment is expected as the legislation moves forward. While insiders say it is likely to mirror the Senate committee’s changes, what the final version will look like— and whether the free speech debate is truly over— remains unclear.
For now, the provision that sparked the uproar is gone, and the viral moments that dominated the debate appear to have faded, at least for this session.
Share Your Story with Forrest
Capitol Reporter Forrest Saunders is dedicated to sharing your voice with political leaders throughout the state. He works to hold our elected leaders accountable and amplify your concerns. Let Forrest know about the issues you want state leaders to focus on.
.
Florida Sheriff’s claims about immigrant arrests miss key details
A Florida sheriff's bold claims about immigrant arrests reveal a more complex picture when court records are examined in detail.
