Executive Summary

  • Florida signed two laws this session that, together, give state officials unprecedented power to surveil residents based on expressed opinions and to brand private organizations "domestic terrorists" — without a jury, a conviction, or meaningful judicial review.
  • Texas is headed toward an April 24 federal hearing that could determine whether a state-run school choice program can exclude accredited private schools based on their religious character — a precedent that would expose every faith tradition to the same treatment.
  • Arizona's Supreme Court is weighing whether to kill a voter-approved dark-money disclosure law backed by 72% of the electorate, a ruling that will ripple through campaign finance law nationwide.
  • Ohio passed meaningful civil forfeiture reform through its House, requiring a criminal conviction before the state can permanently seize most property — a decade-long fight that may finally be close to the finish line.

State-by-State

Florida — The most aggressive expansion of state surveillance power in the current legislative cycle just became law. Governor DeSantis signed HB 945, which authorizes a new Florida Department of Law Enforcement counterintelligence unit empowered to investigate individuals based on their "views" or "opinions" — language that drew bipartisan alarm. The bill's sponsor admitted he hadn't recognized the First Amendment implications until six weeks after introducing it; the constitutional problems remain unaddressed in the final text. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and the Florida First Amendment Foundation both called it a "constitutional trainwreck." Expect litigation before the unit is operational.

Florida — The same legislative session also produced HB 1471, signed April 6, which creates a state-level domestic terrorist designation process controlled by a small number of officials rather than courts or law enforcement. Designated groups lose state funding access; students who "promote" them can be expelled from public universities. Legal scholars note the term "promote" is undefined, creating potential for broad application to advocacy, journalism, and political organizing. The law also prohibits courts from enforcing foreign or religious law — language that, written broadly, could affect Jewish rabbinical courts (Beth Din), Catholic canonical dispute resolution, Islamic arbitration, and binding commercial contracts governed by foreign legal frameworks.

Texas — A federal court has set an April 24 permanent injunction hearing in consolidated lawsuits challenging the Texas Education Freedom Accounts program. At issue: state comptroller Kelly Hancock's blanket exclusion of roughly two dozen accredited private religious schools from a billion-dollar voucher program — schools approved by the same accreditor used by hundreds of participating Christian institutions. Plaintiffs argue the exclusion violates the Free Exercise Clause, equal protection, and due process. The outcome will set a precedent governing whether states can administer religion-neutral school choice programs while selectively applying guilt-by-association theories to some accreditation bodies and not others. Every faith tradition with private schools should be watching this one.

Arizona — The Arizona Supreme Court is considering whether to strike down Proposition 211, a 2022 ballot measure approved by 72% of voters that requires large political spenders to disclose the original source of their donations. Republican legislators are challenging the law on separation-of-powers grounds; the court is separately weighing whether Arizona's state constitution provides stronger First Amendment anonymity protections than the federal standard. Forty-six organizations have already filed disclosures under the law, giving the public its first look at the donors behind major lobbying groups. A ruling against Prop 211 would re-enshrine anonymous mega-spending in state politics and could invite similar rollbacks elsewhere.

Ohio — The state House passed Substitute House Bill 347, significantly limiting civil asset forfeiture. Under current Ohio law, the government can permanently seize property based on allegation alone. The new bill restricts seizure to three circumstances: unclaimed property, cases where the owner is deceased, or where the owner has been indicted for a felony and cannot be brought to justice. The reform has bipartisan backing and heads to the Senate. Ohio would join a growing number of states — including New Mexico, which abolished civil forfeiture entirely — in requiring criminal culpability before the government can take property.

Minnesota — The Minnesota Legislature is considering parallel forfeiture reform, with competing bills on the table: one establishing a $1,500 minimum threshold for seizures and blocking law enforcement from using the federal equitable sharing program to sidestep state limits; another abolishing civil forfeiture outright and replacing it with criminal forfeiture, which requires a conviction. The equitable sharing provision is key — it closes the loophole that has allowed local departments to circumvent state reforms for years by handing cases to federal authorities and splitting the proceeds.

Deep Cut: Florida's Parallel Enforcement Architecture

The two Florida laws signed this session deserve to be read together, because separately they look like anti-terrorism measures, and together they look like something more structurally significant.

HB 945 creates a state counterintelligence unit that can investigate anyone whose expressed opinions are deemed a threat to state "interests" — a phrase with no legal definition in the bill. HB 1471 creates a domestic terrorist designation power held by a handful of officials, with no requirement for criminal charges, no jury, and no clearly defined evidentiary standard. Designated groups lose funding. Students who associate with them lose enrollment.

The constitutional problem isn't the intent — it's the architecture. When enforcement authority is concentrated in executive offices rather than courts, and when the triggering criteria are defined vaguely enough to encompass protected speech, the system becomes a tool that follows political incentives rather than legal ones. History suggests that tools built to target one disfavored group don't stay targeted. The COINTELPRO program was originally about communist infiltration. Florida's new framework would give future administrations — of either party — an unusually powerful set of levers over political life in the state.

Civil libertarians from across the ideological spectrum have flagged this. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which has challenged both right-wing and left-wing campus censorship, called HB 945 an "outrageous claim of authority." That's not a partisan objection. That's a constitutional one.

Upcoming Deadlines

  • April 13 — Federal Religious Liberty Commission holds its final meeting; FACA transparency lawsuit pending in SDNY
  • April 24 — Federal hearing on Texas TEFA permanent injunction; ruling could reshape school choice nationwide
  • Spring 2026 — Arizona Supreme Court expected to rule on Proposition 211 dark money disclosure challenge
  • Ongoing — Ohio HB 347 civil forfeiture reform moves to Senate; Minnesota forfeiture bills in committee
  • TBD — First Amendment litigation against Florida HB 945 expected before unit becomes operational