🔴 Website 👉 https://u-s-news.com/
Telegram 👉 https://t.me/usnewscom_channel
A controversial provision in Florida’s annual farm bill was removed after fierce criticism from MAHA activists.
“Section 48 of the Florida Farm Bill, which would have made it illegal to speak out against certain pesticide and food products, has been removed. MAHA spoke up, and Florida politicians had to listen,” MAHA Action wrote.
“Thank you to Senator Jonathan Martin for all of his hard work. MAHA will always stand up for farmers and free speech,” it added.
🚨HUGE MAHA™ WIN🚨
Section 48 of the Florida Farm Bill, which would have made it illegal to speak out against certain pesticide and food products, has been removed.
MAHA spoke up, and Florida politicians had to listen.
Thank you to Senator Jonathan Martin for all of his hard… pic.twitter.com/76ZnfEKo8I
— MAHA Action (@MAHA_Action) February 10, 2026
Florida Phoenix explained further:
Senators approved SB 290, the Florida Department of Agriculture’s annual bill addressing a myriad of topics, after it had been tabled during a previous meeting.
The bill originally included a provision that would have given producers the ability to take legal action against someone who disparages food products. The committee room filled up with members of the public prepared to defend First Amendment rights. Existing law allows actions for producers of perishable food products that have been disparaged.
Among the audience were environmentalists, agriculture producers, and advocates of President Donald Trump’s Make America Healthy Again movement (MAHA).
“This was not MAHA, just to be clear. This was muzzling MAHA, it shouldn’t happen in the free state of Florida,” Aimee Villella McBride, representing Global Wellness Forum, from Sarasota, said during public comment.
“The MAHA tenets are transparency, informed consent, and reducing chronic exposure, so any law that prohibits that or chills free speech in the process goes against both the federal objectives of MAHA as well as the wonderful state objectives that Casey DeSantis and Surgeon General Ladapo have been leading,” she continued.
“In a major win for free speech, activists across Florida forced lawmakers to reconsider controversial speech-limiting language buried inside a sweeping agriculture bill,” Children’s Health Defense commented.
✅ BIG WIN IN FLORIDA: Floridians Push Back on Agricultural “Gag” Ag Bill
In a major win for free speech, activists across Florida forced lawmakers to reconsider controversial speech-limiting language buried inside a sweeping agriculture bill. pic.twitter.com/EIs0MPDEkg
— Children’s Health Defense (@ChildrensHD) February 11, 2026
“The Florida State Legislature is trying to pass legislation that will protect Big Ag. Big Ag should be open to public criticism, especially if they are making people sick,” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) previously warned.
“HB 433 (Section 47) and SB 290 (Section 48) introduce a major expansion of Florida’s agricultural non-disparagement (food-libel) framework, creating new legal exposure for anyone who publicly criticizes agricultural products or practices,” she added.
Attention, Floridians:
The Florida State Legislature is trying to pass legislation that will protect Big Ag. Big Ag should be open to public criticism, especially if they are making people sick.
HB 433 (Section 47) and SB 290 (Section 48) introduce a major expansion of…
— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) February 7, 2026
WFLX has more:
The backlash spilled beyond the Capitol, fueling viral social media posts and drawing crowds to committee hearings. Among them was Daniel Andrews, founder of Captains for Clean Water, who said the provision threatened the ability of everyday Floridians to speak openly.
“I’m of utmost concern with what’s in our food supply, and I want the ability, just as an American citizen, to be able to speak up,” Andrews said.
After hours of testimony, Senate lawmakers voted to remove the disparagement language entirely, easing immediate concerns about a chilling effect on free speech. The bill now heads to the full Senate for a floor vote, though legislative leaders say the issue may not be settled.
When asked for his thoughts on the removal of the controversial language, Senate President Ben Albritton offered only this:
“I would say the ag bill is a work in progress,” Albritton said.
A House amendment is expected as the legislation moves forward. While insiders say it is likely to mirror the Senate committee’s changes, what the final version will look like— and whether the free speech debate is truly over— remains unclear.