Florida administrative handling of pandemic policies
I. Background: Florida’s Pandemic Response Framework
Florida operates under a decentralized public health system where the Florida Department of Health (FDOH) and the Governor’s Office play key roles during health emergencies. The primary statute that governs public health emergencies in Florida is:
Chapter 381, Florida Statutes
This chapter provides the State Health Officer broad authority during a public health emergency.
It allows for isolation, quarantine, and other restrictive measures when necessary.
In addition, Executive Orders issued by the Governor and emergency rules by administrative agencies shaped the response during the COVID-19 pandemic.
II. Key Administrative Actions and Legal Cases
1. DeSantis Executive Orders & Mask Mandates
Executive Order 21-175 (July 2021)
Governor Ron DeSantis issued this order to prohibit school districts from imposing mask mandates.
The order cited parental rights and claimed that mandates harmed children’s development.
Legal Challenge: McCarthy v. DeSantis (2021)
Parents sued, arguing that the executive order violated the state’s constitutional obligation to provide a "safe" education.
The trial court (Leon County Circuit Court) initially sided with parents, ruling that DeSantis had exceeded his authority.
However, on appeal, the First District Court of Appeal reversed the decision, siding with the Governor.
Key Legal Holding:
The court emphasized parental rights over local school authority, aligning with Florida’s Parents’ Bill of Rights (Fla. Stat. § 1014.03), enacted in 2021.
2. Florida Department of Health v. School Board of Alachua County (2021)
Background:
Several school boards defied DeSantis' mask mandate ban and implemented their own mask rules.
The Florida Department of Health (FDOH) filed administrative complaints and threatened funding reductions.
Legal Issues:
Whether local school boards had the autonomy under Article IX of the Florida Constitution to set health-related policies.
Outcome:
The Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) upheld the FDOH’s authority, stating that the Department acted within its emergency rulemaking powers.
However, the case revealed constitutional tensions between local control and centralized state authority.
3. Green v. Alachua County (2021)
Florida First District Court of Appeal
Facts:
A business owner challenged Alachua County's mask mandate and social distancing enforcement as unconstitutional under state and federal law.
Holding:
The court ruled that the county’s actions violated the Florida Constitution's right to privacy.
It found that forcing individuals to wear masks in public settings without clear legislative backing was unconstitutional.
Significance:
The decision underscored limits on local government authority and emphasized individual rights under Article I, Section 23 (Florida’s right to privacy clause).
It also signaled the judiciary’s resistance to broad local executive power during health emergencies.
4. Florida v. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2021)
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Facts:
Florida sued the CDC, challenging the federal agency’s “No Sail Order”, which prevented cruise ships from operating.
Legal Arguments:
Florida argued that the CDC exceeded its authority under the Public Health Service Act.
The state claimed economic harm and federal overreach.
Ruling:
The court sided with Florida, granting a preliminary injunction against the CDC’s order.
The court found the CDC's actions were not adequately justified under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
Impact:
It was a rare instance where a state successfully challenged federal health authority.
It emphasized Florida’s aggressive anti-restriction stance and reliance on economic arguments.
5. State of Florida v. Biden (Vaccine Mandate Cases, 2021–2022)
Florida filed several lawsuits against federal vaccine mandates, including:
OSHA vaccine-or-test mandates
Federal contractor mandates
Healthcare worker mandates under CMS
Example: State of Florida v. Department of Health and Human Services (CMS Mandate)
Florida argued the CMS mandate for healthcare workers violated the Tenth Amendment and exceeded federal powers.
Federal courts were divided, but the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately upheld the CMS mandate (in a separate case), while striking down the OSHA rule.
Florida’s Result:
Florida enacted state laws (e.g., SB 2-B (2021 Special Session)) banning vaccine mandates in private workplaces unless multiple exemptions were provided.
Legal Strategy:
These cases showcased Florida's reliance on:
Federalism principles
APA violations
Religious and medical exemptions
III. Related Statutory and Administrative Developments
A. Parental Rights and Education Policy
Parents’ Bill of Rights (Fla. Stat. § 1014)
Enacted during the pandemic to codify parental authority in educational and health decisions.
Effect:
Used to justify administrative bans on mask mandates in schools.
B. Executive Emergency Powers
Fla. Stat. § 252.36
Grants the Governor broad emergency management powers.
During COVID-19, this statute supported DeSantis’ executive orders.
Controversy:
Critics argued that prolonged use of executive power circumvented democratic processes.
C. Emergency Rulemaking by Agencies
The FDOH and the Department of Education issued emergency rules governing:
Quarantine
Mask usage
In-person instruction
These rules often bypassed notice-and-comment rulemaking, leading to legal challenges on APA grounds.
IV. Summary of Key Themes from Case Law
| Theme | Description | Supporting Case(s) |
|---|---|---|
| State Preemption over Local Control | State officials blocked local governments and school boards from imposing stricter health measures. | McCarthy v. DeSantis, DOH v. Alachua County |
| Parental Rights vs. Public Health | Parents were given expanded rights to challenge school mandates. | McCarthy v. DeSantis, Fla. Stat. § 1014 |
| Judicial Skepticism of Local Orders | Courts struck down some local mandates on privacy grounds. | Green v. Alachua County |
| State v. Federal Power | Florida challenged federal mandates and CDC authority. | Florida v. CDC, Florida v. HHS |
| Emergency Power Limits | Debates over the constitutional and statutory limits of executive emergency powers. | Executive Orders & SB 2-B |
V. Conclusion
Florida's administrative and legal handling of pandemic policies illustrates a politically charged, legally complex, and aggressively deregulatory approach. Through executive orders, emergency rules, and litigation, the state:
Limited local and federal authority.
Emphasized individual freedoms and parental rights.
Constrained public health mandates even in the face of federal guidance.
The Florida courts played a critical role in mediating these tensions, often siding with state-level executive authority and personal liberty interests over traditional public health frameworks.
RELATED Blog
0 comments