ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — The patient in Room 373 refuses to leave.

Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare earlier this month sued the patient, saying she has refused to depart her hospital room since being discharged last October. The hospital also has asked a state judge in Tallahassee for an injunction ordering the patient to vacate the hospital room and authorizing the county sheriff’s office to assist if necessary.

The hospital said that resources have been diverted from helping other patients because of her occupation of the room.

“Defendant’s continued occupancy prevents use of the bed for patients needing acute care,” the hospital said in the lawsuit.

According to the lawsuit, the woman was admitted to the hospital for medical treatment and a formal discharge order was issued Oct. 6 after it was determined that she no longer needed acute care services. The hospital has repeatedly made efforts to coordinate her departure with family members and offered transportation to obtain necessary identification, the lawsuit said.

Rachel Givens, an attorney for the hospital, said Wednesday that the hospital had no comment. Hospital spokeswoman Macy Layton said Wednesday that the hospital couldn’t discuss active legal matters, in response to emailed questions, including about what type of identification the patient needed. The lawsuit doesn’t say what the patient was treated for, what her hospital bill was or how she was able to stay at the hospital for more than five months despite being discharged.

No attorney was listed for the patient, who is representing herself. Phones numbers listed in an online database for the patient were disconnected. No one answered the phone when a call was put through to her room at the hospital.

An online court hearing on the lawsuit is scheduled for the end of the month.

Under the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, hospitals that receive Medicare funds must provide treatment that stabilizes anyone coming to an emergency department with an emergency medical condition, even if the patient doesn’t have insurance or the ability to pay. Hospitals can be investigated by the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for violations.

The patient can be discharged when the clinicians have determined that any further care can be provided as an outpatient, “provided the individual is given a plan for appropriate follow-up care as part of the discharge instructions,” the federal agency said in an operations manual.

___

Follow Mike Schneider on the social platform Bluesky: @mikeysid.bsky.social.

Across Florida universities, some sociology professors are quietly choosing not to alter their courses in response to new state guidelines restricting how topics like race, gender and sexuality can be discussed. Rather than rewriting syllabi or removing foundational material, as the new demands would call for, they say they are continuing to teach their classes as designed. The professors view the preservation of their curricula not as an act of defiance, but as a professional responsibility to provide students with a full and rigorous education.

In late January, Florida’s department of education introduced what many professors are calling a censored sociology textbook for use in the state’s public colleges and universities, along with a list of proposed guidelines at state schools, restricting various discussions related to systemic discrimination, gender and sexual identity, race-conscious remedies, and the structural causes of inequality. Faculty members say this move reflects a broader effort to narrow academic freedom in higher education and follows several years of legislation aimed at reshaping public university curricula under the banner of combating “woke ideology”.

“This is part of a coordinated assault on civil rights in the state, in the country, including censoring the nation’s history,” said Zachary Levenson, an associate professor of sociology at Florida International University. “The warning is clear to professors: shut up or lose your job.”

What the new Florida guidelines prohibit

Professors say the new proposed guidelines, introduced alongside the textbook, are intentionally broad, discouraging instruction that could be interpreted as promoting certain perspectives on privilege, oppression or structural discrimination. “It’s left at a level of vagueness where it’s unclear what exactly might get faculty in hot water,” said Levenson, who is a United Faculty of Florida union member. “There is no stated sanction. We have repeatedly requested this language and they refuse to provide it,” he added. FIU did not respond to a request for comment.

Levenson pointed to a list of prohibited topics outlined in the proposed guidelines document, which bars course content that frames systemic or institutional discrimination as a driving cause of present-day inequality, suggests that bias is inherent among Americans or describes institutions as intentionally oppressive. The guidelines also restrict discussions that argue that most gender differences are socially constructed, that propose race-conscious remedies to address historical discrimination or that assert a causal relationship between institutional sexism and unequal outcomes. Even course material explaining how individuals understand or determine their sexual orientation or gender identity falls within the scope of what instructors are instructed to avoid. For sociologists, whose field often analyzes structural inequality through those very lenses, the language is unsettling.

“What I find most concerning is that we’re in this phase now where instead of telling us what not to teach, they’re telling us what to teach,” Levenson said. “That feels especially terrifying and authoritarian.” Florida’s department of education did not respond to a request for comment.

Levenson, who has studied historical sociology, said the pattern wasn’t unprecedented. Even where the language does not explicitly forbid a topic, its ambiguity encourages self-censorship, Levenson said.

“I think the purpose of it is to remain at this very ambiguous level so that the chill effect can be really effective,” said an associate professor at Florida International University who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retribution. “There’s no discussion, there’s no email trail. And so this is how authoritarianism works: everyone starts complying and stepping into their intended agenda.”

Similar efforts to restrict how universities teach race, gender and inequality have emerged in legislatures across the country. “This isn’t just about Florida, and it isn’t just about sociology. There’s a much broader attack happening nationally on academic freedom and freedom of speech in universities and elsewhere,” warned Ruth Milkman, a sociology professor at the City University of New York and former president of the American Sociological Association. “I think all of us in academia have an obligation to speak out and protest when our rights are being trampled on. And that’s what’s happening here.”

Levenson pointed to Chile under Augusto Pinochet in the 1970s and ‘80s as one example of where a government didn’t always begin by dismantling entire disciplines outright. Instead, it started by banning certain textbooks, then gradually replaced them with state-approved versions and required their use.

The stakes for the discipline

Sociology emerged in the 19th century as a discipline devoted to studying the structures that shape social life, from labor markets to family systems, and education to criminal justice. To remove sustained examination of race, ethnicity and sexual orientation from that framework, scholars argue, is to hollow out the field.

Some faculty members worry about the long-term impact on students, especially those whose identities are directly implicated by the bans. Restrictions on discussing structural inequality, they say, risk sending a message that certain histories and lived experiences of their students are unimportant.

“They’re being told, not only that they don’t matter, but that narrating their own experiences is a threat,” Levenson said.

The legislative push to reshape sociology and other disciplines has been championed in part by Ron DeSantis, Florida’s governor, who is aligned with the national conservative movement – a loose coalition of thinkers and policymakers who argue that universities have become ideologically captured by progressive values.

“These are people who are committed to a kind of white replacement theory. They think that their own interests are threatened by the advancement of civil rights for people of color and women and immigrants,” Milkman said. In this zero-sum view, she argued, expanding education about systemic inequality and the historical exploitation of marginalized groups is seen not as progress, but as a threat.

National conservatives often frame their critiques as efforts to restore intellectual balance or prevent political indoctrination. Sociology, with its focus on systemic inequality, becomes a flashpoint in that debate. But faculty members say the framing mischaracterizes the discipline. “These classes aren’t meant to make white people feel guilty. It’s to give marginalized people words to understand violence and pain and to help them work through it,” the FIU professor said. “It is so critical that not just people of color, but white students also, have words to understand the world that we now inherit.”

Organizing and risk

Faculty resistance has taken multiple forms. Some advocates, such as former FIU professor Marvin Dunn, who teaches Black history outdoors, have organized learning opportunities and events for students, separate from universities. Others have coordinated with colleagues across Florida campuses to draft public statements or seek legal analysis.

“Part of the work we’ve been doing is building networks across all the campuses so we can exchange information,” Levenson said. “We have to know what’s happening across the state so we can all protect ourselves.” Because the union’s collective bargaining agreement guarantees academic freedom, professors like Levenson have the right to take legal action if they are disciplined for refusing to follow the Florida board of governors’ rules on teaching, but the process can be long and exhausting.

The United Faculty of Florida, the statewide union representing many public university professors, has also been vocal about legal protections. “We’re reminding people that they can’t discipline you based on word of mouth. If they’re threatening to suspend or investigate someone, or issue a letter of caution, it has to be based on something,” said Robert Cassanello, president of United Faculty of Florida and an associate professor of history at the University of Central Florida. “We’re telling everyone to demand written directives, which would give us grounds for legal challenge.”

Yet union protections themselves are under pressure. Recent legislative proposals could weaken collective bargaining rights for public-sector faculty – including senate bill 1296, introduced by Republican lawmakers during the 2026 legislative session – a prospect that has intensified anxiety. The bill is now headed to the senate for a vote.

“Without union protection, the stakes for speaking out will reach a new level,” said Anne Barrett, a sociology professor at Florida State University. “Collective bargaining agreements provide enforceable protections, including provisions related to academic freedom. Faculty at all ranks will be more exposed to political and administrative pressure.” FSU did not respond to a request for comment. In that kind of environment, self-censorship can become a rational response, inevitably diminishing the integrity of the curriculum.

Tenured professors may feel somewhat insulated, though tenure in Florida is not a means of absolute protection. “In 2023, the state mandated post-tenure review for university faculty, undermining one of the traditional safeguards of academic freedom. Tenure no longer provides the level of protection from political pressure that it historically did,” Barrett said. Under this new policy, tenured professors must undergo periodic performance evaluations, typically every five years. The reviews are conducted by departments and university administrators, placing greater authority in the hands of boards of trustees who are appointed by state political leaders.

For adjunct and non-tenure-track faculty, who are often employed on a semester-to-semester basis, don’t receive benefits, and in some cases are working multiple jobs to make ends meet, even minor scrutiny can have serious consequences, including the loss of a contract renewal.

“There’s also a risk of being shamed in public, being dragged,” said the FIU professor, mentioning an incident where a sociology professor was attacked on X. “In this climate, choosing to resist could be very dangerous, especially if you’re part of a marginalized group.”

The censorship is also affecting who wants to work in Florida. “These attacks on academic freedom are leading to a growing number of professors leaving Florida schools and making it hard to recruit some of the best talent,” said Cassanello, who has been a union member for nearly 20 years. “The people who are leaving are the people that the lawmakers in the state of Florida want to remain in Florida. They don’t realize the damage they’re doing to higher public higher education.” University of Central Florida did not respond to a request for comment.

For now, several sociology classrooms in Florida continue under heightened scrutiny, even as some professors say they refuse to restrict or alter what they teach. What remains uncertain is whether the discipline can retain its critical core under mounting political scrutiny – as Barrett put it: “It is difficult to fully grasp how profoundly our workplaces could change if those protections disappear.”

ORLANDO, Fla. – Republican State Rep. Rachel Plakon of Seminole County joined Attorney General James Uthmeier at a Tuesday press conference in Orlando to promote legislation that would tighten residency and employment restrictions for people convicted of sex offenses.

Plakon has a bill lawmakers say would restrict where some convicted sex offenders can live and work; supporters argued the measure would better protect children, while critics said it could create unfair or ineffective restrictions.

In the press conference, Uthmeier announced charges against a Sanford man accused of possession of Child Sexual Abuse Material.

[BELOW: Disturbing discoveries at Sanford home revealed by Florida attorney general]

During the press conference, Uthmeier paused to scold Orlando State Rep. Anna Eskamani for how she voted on Plankon’s bill.

“I do have to point out that your local representative, Anna Eskamani, who’s running for mayor, voted against this bill. I don’t know who in their right mind would vote against restrictions on child predators, against restrictions on an individual like this guy today that lived in this house of horrors, a house decorated in the theme of little kids that he wanted to abuse. There’s no room for that type of discussion in government. There’s no room for that type of debate in the political sphere when it comes to protecting our children. There is no room for that fight. So shame on her for taking that position,” Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier said.

News 6’s Orlando Community Correspondent Mike Valente texted Rep. Anna Eskamani during the press conference to ask why she voted against the bill. He read her response aloud.

He then read her response to Uthmeier.

“So you mentioned Anna Eskamani before. After you did, I texted her and she said, ‘I voted no on SB 212 because while protecting children and holding individuals accountable for crimes is essential, this bill expands residency and presence restrictions in ways that raise serious questions about effectiveness, fairness and unintended consequences,’” Valente said.

Uthmeier responded, “So I don’t know if anyone could hear…I guess he texted Anna Eskamani to ask why she voted ‘No’ on this bill to help combat child predators…and she’s got concerns over further restricting residency to keep predators from living near areas where a lot of kids are going to reside. Again, there’s no excuse for this. It’s wrong, it’s gross, no excuse.“

In her text to Valente, Eskamani also said she believes increasingly broad geographic exclusion zones do not necessarily reduce the risk of reoffending and can carry unintended consequences for people trying to rebuild their lives after conviction.

Eskamani later commented on social media about Uthmeier’s comment: