FAC Weekly Update 2026-03-17-Florida Lawmakers Not Immune from the “Florida Man” Stigma

Weekly update for March 17, 2026. This is recording number 360

Dear Members and Advocates,

Florida has become synonymous with one of the internet’s favorite headline trope: “Florida Man.” The phrase has come to represent the bizarre, the ill-considered, and the kind of decisions that make informed people around the country shake their heads and ask, “What were they thinking?” Unfortunately, the stereotype exists for a reason. From time to time (maybe it’s the intense heat frying our brains), people in our state make choices that seem detached from common sense or reality. And as much as we might like to believe otherwise, that tendency is not limited to individuals who end up in viral news stories. Sometimes the same kind of questionable decision-making finds its way into public policy.

The latest example comes from Tallahassee, where the House and Senate have passed HB 45/SB 212, which expands the web of restrictions imposed on people listed on Florida’s sex offender registry. With each legislative session, new residence and presence restrictions are proposed—additional places people cannot live, additional zones they must avoid, and additional ways to turn ordinary daily life into a legal minefield. These proposals are often introduced with the promise of making communities safer, yet they are rarely accompanied by evidence that they actually accomplish that goal.

Florida already has some of the strictest registry laws in the country. Over the years, layers of restrictions have accumulated until the result is a complex patchwork of prohibitions that can make lawful housing and everyday movement extremely difficult for tens of thousands of people. Experts, researchers, and even past experience in our own state have warned that when restrictions become too broad, the predictable result is instability—difficulty finding housing, difficulty maintaining employment, and in many cases homelessness. None of those outcomes improve public safety.

Floridians have already witnessed the consequences of this kind of policymaking before. Nearly twenty years ago, the nation watched as dozens of registrants were forced to live under the Julia Tuttle Causeway after sweeping residency restrictions left them with nowhere else to go. The images of people living in makeshift encampments beneath a bridge became a national embarrassment for the state—a public spectacle that demonstrated exactly what happens when laws are passed without considering their real-world impact. It was a moment that should have prompted reflection and reform.

Yet here we are, two decades later, still repeating the same mistakes. Instead of learning from the lessons of the past, lawmakers continue to layer new restrictions onto an already overburdened system. The predictable consequences remain largely ignored.

Good policy requires careful thought, evidence, and a willingness to consider unintended consequences. Unfortunately, when legislation is driven primarily by fear or political optics, the result can look a lot like the kind of decisions that make the “Florida Man” headlines in the first place; short-sighted, impulsive, and destined to create problems rather than solve them. Floridians deserve better. Public safety is too important to be shaped by reactionary decision-making or political theater. The question now is simple: after twenty years of clear evidence and public embarrassment, what will it take for our state to finally learn from its own mistakes?

The Florida Action Committee is already consulting with legal experts regarding its implications. Should the Governor decide to sign this measure into law (which we presume he will), FAC is prepared to pursue an appropriate legal challenge to ensure that the courts have the opportunity to review whether these expanding restrictions are consistent with the Constitution and with the principles of sound public policy.

Sincerely,

The Florida Action Committee