Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis announced plans to formally designate more than 90 organizations as foreign terrorist organizations after signing HB 1471 into law, a sweeping measure that creates criminal penalties for material support, bars taxpayer funding to designated groups, and hands the state a permanent enforcement framework independent of Washington.
The announcement, reported by The Center Square on July 4, lands three months after a federal judge struck down a prior DeSantis executive order that attempted similar designations through gubernatorial authority alone. This time, the governor has a statute behind him, and he is asking his cabinet to confirm the designations so they carry, in his words, "the full force of state law."
The list of targeted organizations ranges from Mexican drug cartels to Islamist networks to domestic extremist groups. Named specifically: the Sinaloa cartel, the Gulf cartel, the del Noreste cartel, the Venezuelan prison gang Tren de Aragua, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, and Antifa.
The new law establishes a formal terrorist designation process run through the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Once the governor and his cabinet issue a designation, the consequences are concrete and far-reaching.
State and local governments are prohibited from providing taxpayer funding, contracts, or other public support to any designated group. Public colleges, universities, and school districts cannot use public resources to support or promote designated organizations. Groups that receive the FTO label may be subject to dissolution under state law. And anyone who knowingly provides material support or resources to a designated organization faces criminal penalties.
DeSantis said in a statement that HB 1471 creates "a permanent statutory framework to combat terrorism while protecting the constitutional rights of Floridians." The law also ensures that foreign or religious legal codes cannot override the U.S. or Florida constitutions, a provision aimed at preventing any external legal system from gaining a foothold in state governance.
The governor has already moved on related fronts. He has prohibited Florida colleges and universities from entering agreements with institutions affiliated with foreign countries of concern, restricted taxpayer funds for programs benefiting foreign adversaries, and acted to prevent extremist organizations from operating on public campuses. The FTO designations fit into that broader pattern, a governor who has not been shy about using state power to reshape institutional priorities.
DeSantis first attempted this approach last December, when he issued an executive order directing state agencies "to eliminate the influence of radical terrorist ideologies and organizations operating in Florida." That order designated CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood as foreign terrorist organizations and directed agencies to deny taxpayer funding, contracts, employment, and other public support associated with those groups.
CAIR sued. A federal judge granted the organization's motion for a preliminary injunction, ruling that CAIR had shown a substantial likelihood of succeeding on the merits. No discovery was conducted. No hearings were held. The judge acted on the motion alone.
That ruling effectively froze DeSantis's executive order. But rather than accept the setback, the governor and the Florida Legislature responded with HB 1471, converting the executive action into durable statutory law with a formal designation process and cabinet confirmation. The strategy is straightforward: if the courts say an executive order lacks sufficient procedural grounding, build the procedure into a statute.
Whether that statutory framework survives its own inevitable legal challenge remains an open question. CAIR has already demonstrated a willingness to litigate, and the preliminary injunction ruling suggests at least one federal judge found constitutional problems with the underlying approach. But the legislative path gives Florida stronger footing than a unilateral executive order ever could.
Florida is not the first state to pursue FTO designations at the state level. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott began making such designations four years ago, starting with Mexican cartels. Two years ago, Abbott designated members of Tren de Aragua as foreign terrorist organizations in Texas. He also designated CAIR as an FTO.
CAIR sued Abbott as well. But the Texas case followed a different trajectory. Unlike the Florida proceeding, where the judge acted without discovery or hearings, the Texas case involved full discovery. In May, a federal judge handed Abbott a win. The contrast between the two outcomes is instructive: Florida courts have not always been hostile to Republican priorities, but in this instance, the procedural posture mattered.
The Trump administration has also designated Tren de Aragua, Mexican cartels, and other groups as FTOs at the federal level. DeSantis's action mirrors and reinforces the federal approach, creating a state-level enforcement layer that operates regardless of what future administrations in Washington might do.
The breadth of the designation list is worth noting. More than 90 organizations span categories that rarely appear together in a single government action. Islamic extremist networks sit alongside Latin American drug cartels, a Venezuelan prison gang with a growing footprint in U.S. cities, and Antifa, a decentralized domestic movement that has resisted formal organizational classification in most government contexts.
The inclusion of CAIR is the most legally contested element. CAIR describes itself as a civil rights organization. DeSantis and Abbott have treated it as something else entirely, citing its origins and affiliations. The federal courts have now split on the question, one judge siding with CAIR in Florida, another siding with Abbott in Texas. That split virtually guarantees further litigation and possibly appellate review that could set broader precedent.
The cartels and Tren de Aragua are less legally controversial targets. The Trump administration's federal designations provide a ready-made factual basis for state-level action. Florida's Republican-led government has shown consistent willingness to align state enforcement with federal immigration and security priorities, and the cartel designations fit squarely within that pattern.
HB 1471's criminal penalties for knowingly providing material support or resources to a designated FTO represent the sharpest edge of the new law. The precise statutory language has not been publicly detailed in full, but the framework tracks federal material-support statutes that have survived constitutional scrutiny at the Supreme Court level.
The campus provisions may generate their own political friction. Prohibiting public colleges, universities, and school districts from using public resources to support or promote designated organizations puts administrators on notice. Any campus chapter, speaker invitation, or institutional partnership connected to a designated group could trigger enforcement action.
For taxpayers who have watched public universities host organizations and events that seem openly hostile to American interests, the provision is overdue. For civil liberties advocates, it raises First Amendment questions about associational rights and academic freedom. The courts will sort it out, but in the meantime, the law is on the books, and Florida's legal landscape continues to shift in a direction that prioritizes enforcement over institutional inertia.
DeSantis still needs his cabinet to formally confirm the designations. That step is required for the FTO labels to carry the full force of state law under HB 1471. The full list of more than 90 organizations beyond those named publicly has not been released.
CAIR's existing lawsuit against DeSantis remains active. The preliminary injunction applied to the executive order, not to the new statute, but the organization will almost certainly challenge HB 1471 on similar grounds. The Texas precedent, where Abbott prevailed after full discovery, could prove significant if the Florida case reaches a similar procedural stage.
The deeper question is whether state-level FTO designations represent a durable model or a legal experiment that federal courts will ultimately constrain. Abbott's four-year head start in Texas provides the closest test case. DeSantis's legislative approach, building the designation power into statute rather than relying on executive authority, may prove more resilient than the executive order the courts already struck down.
A federal judge told DeSantis his first attempt wasn't good enough. He came back with a law. That is how the system is supposed to work, and it is worth watching whether the courts respect the difference.
