u/Obversa

Context: 'Griffin' refers to defendant Melanie S. Griffin, Esq., who serves as the Secretary of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, representing the state. 'Hamburger Mary's Florida' refers to Hamburger Mary's, a drag-friendly restaurant and bar located in Orlando, Florida.

Relevant excerpt from the SCOTUS denial to grant certiorari on Florida's appeal to stay the decision of the 11th Circuit, authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh: "To begin with, although Florida strongly disagrees with the District Court's First Amendment analysis, Florida's stay application to this Court does not raise that First Amendment issue. Therefore, the Court's denial of the stay indicates nothing about our view on whether Florida's new law violates the First Amendment. [...] The issue arises here in the context of a First Amendment overbreadth challenge, which presents its own doctrinal complexities about...relief."

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the majority.

The 11th Circuit en banc re-evaluation will include the following reviews:

• (1) Whether the state law regulates content in a way that violates the First Amendment, or if it constitutes a valid regulation to protect children from "obscene" performances.
• (2) Whether state definitions provide adequate notice to businesses and performers.
• (3) Whether the State of Florida can lawfully still prosecute "non-parties" to the lawsuit.

Notably, the original 2-1 decision against the Florida "anti-drag" law repeatedly mentioned Rep. Randy Fine (R-Daytona Beach), a key sponsor of the disputed law who is running for re-election in 2026.

During floor debates, Fine defended the law, stating it was aimed at going after "Drag Queen Story Time" and declared, "If it means erasing a community...then damn right, we ought to do it". House Speaker Paul Renner confirmed that Fine's bill was a response to drag performers engaging with children during a press availability.

"What it is (HB 1423) is a response to an effort, a regrettable effort, by adults, in this case drag queens, who seem to be obsessed with pushing their lifestyle on children," said Renner. "So my point, and I think the point of our members and my side of the aisle, is let kids be kids."

Fine had previously tried to add drag queens to Florida's obscenity statutes, which failed. According to the Orlando Sentinel, "At least the savvy Republicans tried to act like [suppressing speech] wasn't the case. The same can't be said for Fine. Newly released emails show [that] Fine originally tried to target drag acts by tinkering with a statute that mentions 'bestiality' and 'sadomasochistic abuse'...records obtained by Jason Garcia, formerly of the Sentinel, show [that] Fine sent emails to Gov. Ron DeSantis's staff earlier this year (2023) calling for new language that explicitly cracked down on 'drag performances'."

The governor's staff didn't take Fine's suggestion. Instead, they tried a more nuanced approach. Unfortunately for them, Fine had already admitted the state's true motivations multiple times, so the judge actually quoted Fine saying he wanted to target drag performances as evidence that the state was lying when claiming that wasn't the case.

Garcia asked Fine to comment, but Fine claimed "he did not remember proposing the amendment, so he could not say why he ultimately chose not to pursue it". However, Fine also included a line that other "anti-drag" politicians struck, and which may have given the law more standing in court: "The provisions of paragraph (a) do not apply to a minor when the minor is accompanied by his or her parents or either of them."

The third judge on the panel, Senior Judge Gerald Bard Tjoflat, was appointed by President Gerald Ford. (The other two were appointed by Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden.) Tjoflat's objection to the majority's decision primarily involved a belief that the injunction came too early, and the courts should have demurred until they saw how the state enforced the law in practice. This means that the plaintiff would have to be prosecuted to seek relief.

Among the most interesting points made in the opinion:

• The Court found the penalties for violations under SB 1438 "grievous". The penalties for violations include a $5,000 fine for a first offense or a misdemeanor prison sentence of up to a year, both of which were found to be too harsh, and likely unconstitutional.
• On protecting First Amendment rights, they noted that "The government cannot shroud rules in foggy language, and then blame would-be speakers for their fears of what may lurk in the fog." Laws like this use vagueness as a means to get private individuals and businesses to obey in advance, staying as far back as possible from the line of conduct the law prohibits in order to avoid the consequences of violating it. In this way, the state restricts far more First Amendment-protected conduct than they are legally entitled to. Furthermore, the other two judges agreed that "[even] the dissent seems to implicitly recognize [the law] suffers from constitutional problems".
• The judges noted that "[T]he Act's vagueness…means it is likely to stifle a substantial amount of protected speech", explaing that at oral argument, the state had been unable to explain how to decide what kind of performances would be acceptable for kids of different ages, which the law requires venues to do to avoid penalties. They concluded, "If the Secretary's attorney can't articulate the difference, it's hard to imagine how we could expect performance proprietors to know what the Act means".

According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the en banc oral argument for Griffin v. HM Florida will be held in Atlanta, Georgia in June 2026, with no exact date yet.

Hey everyone! I'm u/Obversa, but you can call me Amber. (Yes, that is my real name.) After a months-long effort, I was finally able to gain control of the r/deextinction subreddit, which was previously run by u/ColossalBiosciences, the Reddit account for company Colossal Biosciences. This effort was supported by the moderation teams of r/Paleontology and r/DeExtinctionScience, with the latter subreddit having been founded due to Colossal restricting the subreddit for months to prevent people from criticizing the company.

Q: How did Colossal Biosciences gain control of r/deextinction in the first place?

On July 3, 2024, the Colossal Biosciences account put in a r/redditrequest for r/deextinction, which was unmoderated and abandoned at the time. Colossal stated, "We'd like to build this community into a place for recent updates on de-extinction science and a forum for discussion about de-extinction's ecological benefits and impacts." At the time, the Reddit administrator who approved their request was unaware of that the company intended to turn the subreddit not into a discussion space, but one purely to promote and market Colossal and its projects - and particularly, its upcoming "dire wolf" announcement on April 7, 2025 - while quietly removing any and all criticism(s).

Based on their posts(s), it is clear that the social media manager behind Colossal's Reddit posts expected that, by Colossal being the sole and only moderator of r/deextinction, the company could "control the narrative" related to "all things related to de-extinction", as well as quash dissent. (I would know, since whoever was behind the Reddit account threatened to sue me for criticizing Colossal on r/Paleontology, and Colossal's Reddit account was nearly banned by that subreddit's moderation team.) However, when the "dire wolf" announcement actually happened, this approach backfired for Colossal, causing them to effectively shut down the r/deextinction subreddit by restricting it.

This behavior not only goes against Reddit's Moderator Code of Conduct - particularly, making threats against company critics, and harassing dissenters on other extinction subreddits - but "sitting" on a subreddit, while refusing to moderate it or keep it active, goes against Reddit's policies. Thus, I was able to gain control of this subreddit.

Q: Are you affiliated with Colossal Biosciences in any way?

No, I am not affiliated with Colossal in any way, nor am I employed or paid by them. (Paying moderators also goes against Reddit's Moderator Code of Conduct.) I have moderated r/FanTheories for several years, but consider myself an "amateur de-extinction analyst". I've had a strong interest in paleontology, genetics, and biology since childhood, though I'm currently studying to enter the legal profession; ideally, to become a lawyer or a paralegal.

Q: Am I allowed to post Colossal Biosciences content on r/deextinction?

Yes, we will be allowing users to post content from Colossal Biosciences, with some caveats:

• It must follow our "no promotional material" rule; or "sharing news related to specific companies and/or individuals is totally fine, but this is not a place to promote specific products, channels, companies, etc." We also don't allow misleading, clickbait, or inaccurate news or post titles, so you're free to editorialize or change any news headlines that you feel may violate the "no promotional material" rule to be neutral.
• Users must be free to criticize the company, or comment about issues or problems they see with Colossal's work. (For example, see my post on r/DeExtinctionScience here.) We will also be maintaining this rule: "This community is focused on the positive side of 'de-extinction' science as a method of preserving biodiversity. We're not focused on placing blame or protesting specific people/companies/organizations." (The striken area will be removed.) This means that, while users are free to voice their displeasure, we'd prefer that you keep it to specific thread(s) about new Colossal announcements, as opposed to making a bazillion individual threads complaining about the company and its projects.
• All links must be from credible sources; ideally, CNN, Reuters, and mainstream news.
• The thread(s) must specify when AI (Artificial Intelligence) is used, even by Colossal.
• We are still debating on whether or not to allow Colossal memes on r/deextinction.

Q: Will Colossal Biosciences be allowed to post on r/deextinction?

Unclear. It appears as though the company has abandoned its official Reddit account.

Q: What's next for r/deextinction and r/DeExtinctionScience?

According to r/DeExtinctionScience moderator u/Freak_Among_Men_II, now that we have regained control of the original subreddit, "r/deextinction will be for the science, and r/DeExtinctionScience will be for calling out malpractice, misleading claims, and ethical or legal violations by Colossal Biosciences and any other entities (i.e. Revive & Restore, et al.) involved in de-extinction. r/deextinction, now under new management, can cover the purely scientific and wildlife conservationist aspects. Meanwhile, r/DeExtinctionScience can still be used to call out fraud and malpractice within the de-extinction scientific community. Moving forward, the two subreddits will work hand-in-hand to promote the enactment of ethical standards and scientific dialogue around the topic of de-extinction on Reddit. However, any criticism of Colossal needs to be reasonable and evidence-based. Needless hate for the sake of it isn't constructive, nor does it contribute anything meaningful to the conversation; in fact, it actively harms our cause. If/when Colossal is able to change their ways and do better as a company, this purpose will be rendered obsolete, and will no longer be part of this subreddit's mission." [Note: Colossal statements may be shared.]

This will not only help to keep "anti-Colossal" circlejerk posts off of r/deextinction and avoid harassment and brigading campaigns, especially in the case the company's Reddit account decides to start posting there again, but r/DeExtinctionScience as a separate space that is specifically for critiquing the field of "de-extinction" overall.