State ban over Florida nurse's vulgar post sparks First Amendment fight

John A. Torres

The Florida nurse fired from her job as a delivery room nurse for vulgar comments made about White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt's pregnancy and subsequently banned by the state from practicing, is fighting to reverse that decision.

The nurse, Lexie Lawler, who worked at a Boca Raton hospital, filed a petition with Florida’s First District Court of Appeal on Feb 20, challenging her suspension by the Florida Department of Health citing the First Amendment as well as due process concerns.

In case you missed it, here's what Lawler posted in a video: "As a labor and delivery nurse, it gives me great joy to wish Karoline Leavitt a fourth-degree tear. I hope that you f---ing rip from bow to stern and never sh-- normally again, you c---.”

The state acted swiftly. Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier said on Jan. 27 that "being fired isn’t good enough. Any healthcare worker who fails to uphold his or her obligation to provide adequate, safe healthcare should not be licensed in Florida."

The following day, he announced Lawler was no longer allowed to practice nursing in Florida, saying "making statements that wish pain and suffering” on others — especially when tied to their clinical role — crosses an ethical line and she should not remain licensed in Florida.

No matter where you land on the political spectrum or even if you are rightfully disgusted by her comments, it's a bit scary to think the government can step in and keep you from earning a living for something you've said.

Bobby Block, executive director of the First Amendment Foundation last week said it was the right of an employer to distance themselves from the nurse but added that "state-imposed professional punishment is different. When the government intervenes to end someone’s ability to practice their profession based on political speech, the chilling effect reaches far beyond one individual."

Lawler's petition said the Department of Health failed to identify "any patient harm, clinical misconduct, workplace discipline, or deviation from standards of care during Lawler’s 12-year nursing career."

“This case presents a serious constitutional question,” Lawler said. “Can the government use emergency powers to suspend a professional license based solely on speech made at home, without evidence of patient harm?”

Lawler maintains that she has always treated every patient professionally and without regard to political belief.

“For more than a decade, I have cared for women and newborns during some of the most important moments of their lives,” Lawler said. “This appeal is about ensuring that emergency powers are used lawfully and that constitutional protections apply to licensed professionals, even when their speech is unpopular.”

Unpopular might be a kind way of looking at it.

Lawler's appeal argues that emergency authority exists to address clear and present danger, not speculation about what might occur. It also states that the order is overbroad because it bars Lawler from practicing nursing in any capacity, including roles that involve no direct patient contact.

"We live in a highly tumultuous political era. There is plenty of rude, crude, and inflammatory commentary on the Internet from all sides of the political spectrum," wrote Lawler's attorney Julie Gallagher of the Tallahassee firm Grossman, Roopnarine & Bayo. "Petitioners comments contributed to this dynamic, but they do not have anything to do with her nursing practice or her ability to practice nursing. If a veterinarian says he hates cats, the board of veterinary medicine would not and could not revoke his license out of fear he might treat a cat or all animals badly."

To that end, Lawler has asked to be allowed to practice nursing that involves no patient contact while her appeal is pending.

But retired Brevard County prosecutor, Gary Beatty, who for a while worked as a prosecutor for the Florida Board of Nursing, cited Florida Statute Section 464.072 in his argument for why Lawler's suspension was legal, especially if her ability to safely practice nursing is impaired. Beatty's argument is that the mental condition of a medical professional wishing someone pain and suffering in an expletive-filled social media post shared publicly and proudly is obvious.

Block and Beatty are both correct. Having the state impose professional punishment is "chilling." But so is the thought that someone suffering mentally be allowed to practice nursing.

Incredibly, a few days after Lawler was suspended, another registered nurse ― Erik Martindale ― was suspended from practicing nursing in the state for taking to Facebook to say he would not provide anesthesia to MAGA patients. He initially tried saying his Facebook account had been hacked.

Lawler's comments, as well as Martindale's, will certainly be test cases for First Amendment rights but they also beg more questions. No one in their right mind would take to social media to angrily rant their deranged, vulgar thoughts with the world, right? How about we do a better job editing ourselves?

Maybe we don't need to share our darkest, most vile thoughts with the rest of the world. It's a sick enough place as it is. Maybe the problem is in social media itself. Maybe we're not mature enough yet as a species for things like Facebook or TikTok. Maybe.

But maybe that's a column for another day.

*Contact Torres at [email protected]. You can follow him on X @johnalbertorres *

Support local journalism and become a subscriber. Visit *floridatoday.c*om/subscribe