In recent weeks, Florida has become the epicenter of a heated debate over public art, free speech, and the power of government as state officials move to erase decorative street art from cities across the state. What began as a seemingly routine update to transportation policy has spiraled into a statewide controversy, pitting local governments and community members against Governor Ron DeSantis and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT).
The conflict erupted into public view on August 21, 2025, when FDOT crews painted over the rainbow-colored crosswalk at the site of the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando—a memorial honoring the 49 victims of one of America’s deadliest mass shootings. According to USA Today Network-Florida, the removal was part of a sweeping directive from FDOT to eliminate all non-uniform pavement markings, including murals and crosswalk art, on both state and local roads. The directive, backed by a new law (SB 1662) signed by DeSantis in March, allows FDOT to withhold funding for road projects from municipalities that fail to comply.
The backlash was swift. Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer pleaded with the state to make an exception for the Pulse memorial, insisting in a letter to FDOT dated August 27 that "The Original Design was not intended to be, nor do we believe it to be any form of political speech, nor does it include any words or messages or symbols." Dyer emphasized that the crosswalk had caused no pedestrian accidents since its installation and that it followed state crosswalk standards, with rainbow colors carefully placed between the white lines marking the crossing. Despite these assurances, the state held firm. As DeSantis bluntly put it at a press conference, "We will not allow our state roads to be commandeered for political purposes."
The controversy is not limited to Orlando. Across Florida, cities like Tampa, St. Petersburg, Gainesville, West Palm Beach, Key West, Miami Beach, and Delray Beach have been ordered to remove their decorative crosswalks and murals, many of which celebrate LGBTQ+ pride, Black history, or local culture. In St. Petersburg, Associated Press reported, two pastors were arrested after using prayer to block crews from painting over a “Black History Matters” mural. In Orlando, three people were arrested for coloring the freshly repainted crosswalk outside the Pulse memorial with chalk. Tampa’s City Council responded by unanimously passing a resolution condemning DeSantis’s policy, with officials saying they feel “held hostage by Tallahassee.” Tampa is now set to remove art from 47 locations in the coming weeks.
FDOT’s position is that the new manual, updated in 2023, prohibits “non-uniform traffic control devices, such as pavement markings on state and local roads.” The department insists the rules are being applied neutrally, regardless of the subject matter. DeSantis has repeatedly pointed out that the ban applies to all forms of street art, including "Blue Lives Matter" murals supporting police and even checkered flag crosswalks at Daytona International Speedway. “This has been done across the state and it’s been done regardless of the messaging that’s been used,” he said, emphasizing that the directive is not targeted at any particular group.
Yet critics remain unconvinced. State Senator Carlos Guillermo Smith, a Democrat from Orlando, argued that DeSantis “invented an excuse to punish LGBT visibility and draw attention to himself, and now it’s costing taxpayers millions.” Smith noted that Florida law has required uniformity in crosswalks since the 1970s, with FDOT exceptions, and that the new law merely broadened the department’s authority to withhold funds. “He was not required to do this. He was not enforcing a new law,” Smith said, adding, “He wanted to punish LGBTQ visibility and wanted to make an example out of the rainbow crosswalk at Pulse nightclub because he is a depraved person and he’s been radicalized by his own political ambition.”
Local leaders and community members argue that decorative crosswalks are more than just paint on pavement—they are symbols of community identity and, in some cases, serve as memorials. The Tampa City Council’s resolution called on the state to “respect local decision-making authority and to allow communities the freedom to express themselves through public art and design.” Many point out that FDOT previously approved and even supported many of the installations now being erased. As the USA Today Network-Florida reported, the department’s own manual allows for exceptions “if the public agency is able to demonstrate good cause.”
Beyond the question of local control, the removals have sparked a broader debate over the First Amendment and free expression. Legal experts are divided. Maru Smith-Opabola, a First Amendment fellow at the University of Florida Levin College of Law, told USA Today that courts have not definitively protected crosswalk or asphalt art as free speech, though streets and sidewalks have historically been public forums for protest and expression. The Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University weighed in, stating that asphalt art is “clearly political speech,” but also noting that the government can regulate such expression as long as it does so in a viewpoint-neutral manner.
Some see the crackdown as part of a broader pattern in Florida. In recent years, the DeSantis administration has placed restrictions on discussions of gender and sexuality in schools and has supported the removal of books with LGBTQ+ themes from school libraries. University of Central Florida political science professor Aubrey Jewett told USA Today that the move to eliminate rainbow crosswalks “seemed like a further escalation of removing anything 'LGBTQ+ related' from the public.”
The issue has even drawn national attention. In early July, U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy sent a letter to all 50 state governors urging them to review roadways and crosswalks for safety, explicitly stating, “Taxpayers expect their dollars to fund safe streets, not rainbow crosswalks.” Duffy’s comments were seized upon by FDOT officials as further justification for the crackdown.
Not everyone is convinced by the official rationale. In a letter to the editor published September 1, Bradenton resident Lisa Tongue criticized DeSantis for what she called an “undemocratic” policy that “erases joy and happiness from the state.” Tongue lamented, “By warning municipalities across Florida – and threatening to withhold funds from them – DeSantis is placing local government officials in a terrible situation. What choice do they have? This is the antithesis of democracy.” She expressed hope that a future governor would reverse the ban and other policies she described as “horrible, fascist.”
For now, the paint is coming off. But the debate over who gets to decide what belongs on Florida’s streets—and what those decisions say about the state’s values—is far from over. As deadlines loom and more crosswalks are scrubbed clean, communities across Florida are left grappling with the loss of symbols they say made their cities brighter, more inclusive, and more reflective of the people who call them home.