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
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I appreciate the idea of going to the Supreme Court. Would it be possible to get a hearing? I moved to Florida with great hope, but have found out it’s not the place I thought it was. So sad. If nothing else, could be try to get the state to follow the Tiered system offered by the government?
“I moved to Florida with great hope”
I never thought I’d see anyone say such a thing. FloriDUH has been the butt of jokes for at least the past couple of decades, and for good reason.
The definition of insanity.
Couple of thoughts… First, thank you FAC and all of us who called or wrote legislators recently about SB 212. As terrible as the legislation is, it was heading to be much worse until we got involved. FAC and members made a significant and positive difference, and I believe we (and others) were heard!
Second, in addition to fear, ignorance and politics, I believe a primary driver of these stupid bills is “hate”. I’m a 5th generation Floridian, and I’ve never seen or felt this level of hate driven insanity before – from some politicians and sheriffs to the average Florida Man scrolling social media and walking the streets.
Florida has become a hateful place where we have law enforcement posting mugshots on social media which incite expressions of extreme violence against citizens right under their noses – and this is tolerated (encouraged).
I believe one way to get out ahead of the hate, fear, and insanity is by influencing the news media which in turn shapes public perception, which can affect pandering politicians.
Thank you FAC for addressing all of these fronts in our fight for sanity and common sense – even in Florida.
Lets start calling all this pile, reactionary legislation against us child safety slop because that’s exactly what it amounts to.
It’s 100 percent virtue signaling and pandering for political points.
It seems to me that all of us (FAC, individuals, etc) only pursue changes in a reactive way, much like you say the way the lawmakers are passing these laws. Is there not a way to create change now, and not lie back waiting for new things to come down to attack?
I’m no lawyer, just a crusty old retired Air Force MSgt, and I don’t know all the legal cases, too many to recall, but to my knowledge it has been many years since the supreme court ruled registries are ‘not punishment’. I know the courts always look to precedent as a cop-out to having to make their own, potentially politically risky decisions, but the laws have changed so much and been added to so much why doesn’t someone file a new case directly against the registry itself and not piece-milling each individual small add-ons to it. Even if you win that small victory, its just cutting a toenail off the gorilla, not much help in the long run for most of us.
I hope I’m not coming across as criticizing anyone, not my intention, it just seems we get so focused on each new legislation that comes out no one has their eyes on the overall monster that breathes over all of us 24/7. I am also curious why/how the state allows cities and counties to add so many ridiculous laws above and beyond what the state requires, without having to provide registrants with laws they have passed. I don’t even know all the rules of my county/town since if you ask they usually don’t even know.
Thanks for providing us a place to vent as there is no one else who will/wants to listen. Brutally depressing life we live…
In order to challenge a law, it must be enacted. You won’t have standing to challenge a law that has not been enacted yet.
What we do while a bill is in the legislature is to advocate against it. We organize speakers to show up to oppose legislation. We hold meetings with lawmakers. We post calls to action encouraging people to call and write in opposition. I don’t think you are accurate in your assessment that anyone is being reactive here. We were very proactive in fighting this bill and we were very successful in getting the most onerous parts of it stricken.
I was afraid my comment would be taken that way. I was not at all downing FAC or anything you do, I contribute yearly in the hopes you can actually make a difference for all of us. It just seems that attacking it little by little is tedious and expensive. The entire registry is a law that has been enacted, when was the last time the registry itself was attacked in court?
Federal SORNA calls for a tiered system, why has Florida not followed that example? Has this been pursued? I’m sure it has but googling all this brings up so much beyond my meager law experience its overwhelming. Not to mention so depressing after a few hours of reading.
Please forgive if I offended, that was certainly not my intent.
No offense taken.
The challenges have to be taken step by step because as each new law is passed it has to be challenged within the statute of limitations and we are bound by precedent that had previously held that earlier generation obligations were constitutional. When we challenged the internet identifiers, we won. When we challenged frequent and unnecessary in person reporting (intrastate travel, vehicles), we won. So, unfortunately, it has to be chipped away at.
Federal SORNA is a floor, not a ceiling. SORNA sets the MINIMUM requirements and states are allowed to exceed them, so long as they don’t go below them. That is why SORNA says a tier I has to stay on for 15 years (but can petition after 10), tier II is 25, tier III is life, but Florida makes everyone life and that makes it compliant with SORNA’s minimum requirements.
I am a crusty old retired Air Force MSGT as well, an I agree totally with you
Crusty Air Force MSgts, many other USAF Enlisted Leaders, and other NCOs saved a lot of bacon while in uniform, so don’t be discounting yourself. The lessons you all taught were valuable.
FAC thank you for the review and the possible legal action. Is it possible to get an injunction before July 1st? If so than can this be addressed in the July 13th trial?