These Florida cities are defying a ban on rainbow-colored Pride crosswalks
Why it matters: While other Florida cities acted quickly to remove their Pride-themed crosswalks and avoid violating the state's June 30 mandate, Key West and Delray Beach appear to be the first to push back against the DeSantis administration.
Any response from the state could influence how other cities with Pride-themed street art, like Miami Beach and Fort Lauderdale, decide to move forward.
The latest: Key West voted Aug. 6 to explore all legal avenues to preserve its popular rainbow crosswalks at the intersection of Duval and Petronia streets, which the city says is one of the island's "most iconic and visited locations."
The city also voted to designate the crosswalks as a cultural landmark and the surrounding area as the "Historic Gayborhood of Key West," honoring the city's LGBTQ community.
In Delray Beach, the City Commission decided Tuesday to defy a previous order from the city manager and keep its painted Pride intersection — for now at least, the South Florida Sun Sentinel reported.
After city manager Terrence Moore announced in July that the city "must adhere to state guidelines," commissioners this week said it would be premature to remove the crosswalk without receiving a direct order from the state.
Zoom in: Neither Miami Beach nor Fort Lauderdale have reacted to the mandate, and the cities' Pride street markings are still in place.
Miami Beach Commissioner Alex Fernandez tells Axios the city hasn't received any communication from the state, so there's "no action for the City Commission to take at this time."
Fernandez and other local leaders have slammed the state's argument that painted crosswalks are a traffic hazard.
What they're saying: Fernandez tells Axios that the city's Pride crosswalk on Ocean Drive and 12th Street met all safety standards when it was approved in 2018 and remains a safe intersection.
"From my perspective, if major work were ever done there in the future, that would be the time to review and consider any new regulation, just as we would with any other change to the traffic manual," Fernandez said.
"In the meantime, I believe this is a non-issue, a distraction, a solution in search of a problem."
Threat level: The mandate — which echoed guidance from the Trump administration on removing political messages from roadways — says noncompliant governments may lose state transportation funding.
Zoom out: Some cities, like St. Petersburg, have been contacted by Florida's Department of Transportation requesting a list of all painted crosswalks and other traffic infrastructure.
But St. Pete Mayor Kenneth Welch announced this week the city wouldn't take any action until it receives guidance from the state on whether certain public art can be exempted from the mandate.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
5 hours ago
- Axios
"Next time in Moscow": Putin extends Trump invitation as summit ends
At the conclusion of Friday's "productive" but inconclusive summit on Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin quipped to President Trump: "Next time in Moscow." The intrigue: Putin made the remark in English, a language he rarely speaks in public. The suggestion drew a surprised chuckle from Trump, who didn't rule it out but said he'd "get a little heat for that one." The big picture: If Trump were to travel to Russia, it would be the first time in over a decade that an American president set foot on Russian soil. Putin is angling for a more friendly relationship with the U.S. after being isolated on the world stage, and would likely consider such a visit a major coup. But there's no sign as of now that it's likely to happen. What they're saying: Putin's "next time in Moscow" quip came just at the end of Trump's televised remarks. "Oh, that's an interesting one," Trump replied. "I'll get a little heat on that one, but I could see it possibly happening." The White House did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment on the president's willingness to travel to the Russian capital. Catch up quick: In a joint press briefing, President Trump called the highly-anticipated peace talks "productive" but said that the two leaders "didn't get there" on a ceasefire or on ending the war in Ukraine. Trump said the two agreed on many issues but could not come to an agreement on "the biggest one." Putin said that it was very important for the two countries "to go back to cooperation," and that it was time for the superpowers to shift from "confrontation to dialogue." Neither Putin nor Trump offered any details of a potential agreement. Flashback: Barack Obama was the last U.S. president to visit Russia over a decade ago, according to the State Department.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Federal judge guts major portion of Florida's book ban, in a blow to DeSantis
A federal judge has closed the chapter on key parts of Florida's censorious ban on school library books that conservatives deem 'pornographic' and harmful to children. Amid a broader assault on diversity in the state, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a law in 2023, known as House Bill 1069, that set up a process for parents to challenge books for removal from school libraries that they feel are unsuitable for young readers. The repressive law requires that schools remove books within five days of a parents' complaint and make them unavailable while they're reviewed. The process, broadly targeting books with 'pornographic' content or that 'describe sexual conduct,' has ensnared many titles by nonwhite and LGBTQ authors over purported obscenity. Last year, multiple publishing companies, Florida parents and authors filed a lawsuit seeking to thwart the bill, naming as defendants various members of the state education board and school boards in Orange and Volusia counties. And the suit appears to have succeeded, in large part. 'By enacting HB 1069, the Florida legislature sought to prohibit material from entering or remaining in school libraries that is not obscene for minors,' District Court Judge Carlos Mendoza said in his ruling on Wednesday, which found the section that targets descriptions of sexual conduct to be unconstitutional. He listed several examples: The following books, among others, have been removed: The Color Purple, Half of a Yellow Sun, Cloud Atlas, The Splendid and the Vile, I am Not Your Perfect Mexican Daughter, The Freedom Writers Diary: How a Teacher and 150 Teens Used Writing to Change Themselves and the World Around Them, On the Road, Nineteen Minutes, Paper Towns, Looking for Alaska, How the García Girls Lost Their Accents, The Kite Runner, Slaughterhouse-Five, Shout, Last Night at the Telegraph Club, The Handmaid's Tale, Native Son, Kaffir Boy: The True Story of a Black Youth's Coming of Age in Apartheid South Africa, Water for Elephants, Beloved, Song of Solomon, The Bluest Eye, and Homegoing. None of these books are obscene. The judge said the law's focus on books that 'describe sexual content' is 'overbroad' and 'unconstitutional,' and he said the law 'mandates the removal of books that contain even a single reference to the prohibited subject matter, regardless of the holistic value of the book individually or as part of a larger collection.' Mendoza also rejected conservatives' argument that libraries — and the books in them — are forums for 'government speech.' He wrote that 'many removals at issue here are the objecting parents' speech, not the government's,' and that 'slapping the label of government speech on book removals only serves to stifle the disfavored viewpoints.' Citing Supreme Court precedent, the judge said, 'To be sure, parents have the right to 'direct the upbringing and education of children,' but the government cannot repackage their speech and pass it off as its own.' Mendoza declined to strike down the law completely, writing that the law's reference to 'pornographic' content can be read as synonymous with content considered 'harmful to minors' under Florida law, which means some books could still be banned but only if they meet a rigorous standard for obscenity known as the 'Miller Test.' The Authors' Guild, which was a plaintiff in the suit and claims to represent more than 16,000 members, called the ruling 'a sweeping victory for readers and authors.' State officials said they plan to appeal the ruling. This article was originally published on Solve the daily Crossword
Axios
9 hours ago
- Axios
DOJ gives Boston and other sanctuary cities an ultimatum
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has put Boston on notice: Cooperate with the Trump administration's immigration crackdown or else. Why it matters: Boston is one of 32 cities the Trump administration is going after for having policies that restrict local police cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Driving the news: Bondi gave Boston Mayor Michelle Wu until Tuesday to send a response confirming her "commitment to complying with federal law," per a letter she sent to Wu this week. The letter asks Wu to identify specific initiatives the city is taking to eliminate sanctuary policies. What they're saying:"Any sanctuary jurisdiction that continues to put illegal aliens ahead of American citizens can either come to the table or see us in court," Bondi wrote on X Thursday, announcing the "demand letters." The other side:"Unlike the Trump administration," Wu said in a statement to Axios, "Boston follows the law." Wu defended the city's policies to a congressional panel in March. She said barring police cooperation with federal immigration agents who don't have a warrant fosters trust between crime victims, witnesses and police, among others.
