Florida Farm Bill 433, Vol. 2: Free Speech and Agricultural Disparagement
- The Fly Box LLC
- 11 minutes ago
- 4 min read
This feature was written by The Fly Box and published in Casts That Care, our charity-driven fly fishing newsletter.
Casts That Care delivers real stories, deep dives, and the heart of the fly fishing world while donating 50 percent of all subscription fees to a different fishing-related nonprofit each month. For February, those funds will support Her Waters, Inc.
If you read Vol. 1, you know House Bill 433 and Senate Bill 290 are agriculture bills that include something far more serious: a rewrite of Florida’s food disparagement law.
In this installment, we’re breaking down why so many people, from fishing guides to constitutional lawyers, are saying this bill is about more than farming. It’s about speech.
Not yelling fire in a crowded theater speech. Everyday speech. Citizen testimony. Public comment. Online advocacy. Research. Journalism.
The Legal Shift That Opens the Door
Under current Florida law, you can be sued if you knowingly lie about perishable food in a way that causes financial damage. That’s been on the books since the ‘90s.
But Section 47 (in HB 433) and Section 48 (in SB 290) change that. They expand the law to include:
Any agricultural product (not just perishable food)
Any agricultural practice (fertilizer, pesticides, burning fields, water drainage, etc.)
Any public statement not based on what the law calls “reliable scientific data.”
It also shifts legal pressure by letting agricultural producers recover attorney’s fees if they win, but denying that same right to defendants, even if the lawsuit was baseless.
This is what First Amendment advocates call a one-way trapdoor: if a grower wins, you pay. If you win, you still lose.
Who Could Be Targeted?
The danger here isn’t hypothetical. It’s built into how the law is written.
If you post a video blaming algae blooms on fertilizer runoff…If you testify at a city hearing about pollution from sugarcane burning…If you publish a scientific paper that links farming to declining water quality…
Under the new law, you could be sued if an agricultural business decides your words cost them money.
Captains for Clean Water said it with this sentiment:
“This bill doesn’t stop misinformation; it stops conversation altogether.”
It doesn’t just silence people who are wrong. It scares people out of speaking at all.
What Makes This Different from Defamation?
Typical defamation laws require proof that someone lied with actual malice — that they knowingly said something false with the intent to harm. Public figures, especially, have a high bar to meet.
This bill lowers the standard. It focuses on whether the statement was "not based on reliable scientific data" — a vague definition that’s hard to prove or disprove.
Legal analysts and free speech groups warn this could create a chilling effect, where people censor themselves to avoid legal trouble. It doesn’t take many lawsuits to get there. Just the fear of one is enough.
What Experts and Advocates Are Saying
Anna Upton, CEO of Everglades Trust, told lawmakers:
“This provision allows for lawsuits based not on actual falsehoods, but on whether someone else feels economically harmed. It silences critics. It’s a First Amendment problem.”
The First Amendment Foundation of Florida warned the bill could be used against reporters, researchers, and nonprofits who are just doing their jobs.
Fishing guides, outdoor writers, water quality experts, all could end up in court for sharing what they see or what the data shows.
Why This Matters for Conservation
Most clean water wins in Florida have come from public pressure: guides documenting algae, scientists calling out pollution, and citizens rallying to stop wetland destruction.
But under this law, the act of calling it out becomes risky.
That’s the issue. You don’t have to lie to be sued. You just have to challenge the wrong people in the wrong way.
If this law had existed 10 years ago, some of the stories that sparked water advocacy in Florida may have never been told.
What Happens If It Passes?
It’s not about whether every company will sue. Most won’t.
But the law will give powerful interests a new legal weapon. The threat will hang over activists, scientists, and journalists. Fewer people will speak. Less truth will be told.
Florida’s environment, and the people trying to protect it, can’t afford that.
In Vol. 3, we’ll walk through what happens next, what legal history tells us, and how Floridians can take action.
If you care about clean water, conservation, or free speech, now is the time to pay attention.
Share this with someone who fishes, someone who speaks up, or someone who needs to know what’s at stake.
This feature was written by The Fly Box and published in Casts That Care, our charity-driven fly fishing newsletter.
Casts That Care delivers real stories, deep dives, and the heart of the fly fishing world while donating 50 percent of all subscription fees to a different fishing-related nonprofit each month. For February, those funds will support Her Waters, Inc.
Comments