>>This week on NewsNight, the fight over the removal of a rainbow crosswalk at the Pulse memorial as the state takes aim a roadway art throughout Florida.

Plus, Florida's attorney general asks the US Supreme Court to strike dow one of the state's own gun laws.

NewsNight starts now.

[MUSIC] Hello, I'm Steve Mort, welcome to NewsNight, where we take an in-depth look at the top stories and issues in Central Florida and how they shape our community.

First, tonight, politics and art collide again this time on Florida's roadways.

A recent decision by the state Department of Transportation to paint over a rainbow adorned crosswalk at the Pulse Memorial in Orlando late at night, set off a firestorm of controversy.

Since then, community members have been returning daily to the site to color in the crosswalk using chalk now under the watchful eye of police.

The June memo from the Florida Department of Transportation outlines the kinds of markings it says do not compl with federal or state standards set out in FDOT's updated 2025 Design Manual.

Florida statute requires public roads meet federal standards as a minimum, and that where state criteria are more stringent, they must be followed.

The governor this week cited a state law he signed in June requiring FDOT to enforc Florida's new design standards.

>>I think there was a feelin amongst the elected officials.

I mean, certainly in other parts of the country had gotten way out of control, to where, really the safety and the use of the roads was, almost secondary to people, being able to appropriate that for different types of messaging.

>>FDOT's given citie a list of offending locations, including at this intersection, at Orange and Central in downtown Orlando.

The state now says all displays on roads, regardless of cause or message, must be removed.

That's now starting to happen around the state.

>>I think it's just a change in policy, and we don't want to be in a situation where we're playing whack-a-mole saying oh no that mural's fine, but that's not.

We think we think the pedestrians may get confused there.

We think a driver oh no that's fine.

This because you know then you get into like oh there's a content out thing and all that.

No, we're just not doing it, that we're out of that business in Florida.

And so all they're doing is just enforcing the law that had been passed.

And I understand there may be people that disagree with it.

I mean, you know, there's laws that are on the books that I enforc that I may not fully agree with.

But I took an oath to, to do it.

And so so that's the way the cookie crumbles.

And so, but there was a change in law.

There was a change in guidance that has been issued.

And now with the Trump administration, you know, they are very aggressive on sayin that the roads should not have, the markings on them.

And that's not the appropriate thing to do.

So, so I think you kind of have agreement now.

State, federal, I think we're all swimming in the same direction.

Most local governments, I think, are fine.

They're like, look at the law change.

The law changes.

You know, you're always going to have the key west of the worl that are going to virtue signal.

That's just what they do.

I get it, I know not my first rodeo.

But the reality is, you know, they're not they don't have a legal leg to stand on here.

>>In July, U.S. Transportation Secretary Sea Duffy wrote to state governors calling for intersections and crosswalks to be kept free from distractions, saying in the statement roads are for safety, not political messages or artwork.

>>Well, that's the reasoning.

What about the criticism?

I caught up with two prominent local leaders this week at the Pulse site, Democratic Stat Senator Carlos Guillermo-Smith and Orlando City Commissioner Patty Sheehan.

>>Everyone was very upset about this decision.

This was the first one to get painted over, which I think was a very, pathetic and cruel thing to do because this is, of course, the most meaningful one.

This is the most meaningful crosswalk as part of this memorial.

And then they proceeded to start, start painting over all of the other crosswalks that we just did during an FDOT project.

So I think that they're trying to say, oh, well, you know, this has to comply with state law.

They just finished this two weeks ago.

Are you kidding me?

This the they spent a week at City Hall talking about Department of Governmental Efficiency and DOGE-ing us and telling us that this is about funding and spending our money appropriately.

And yet, yet they they're making us waste almost $1 million.

I don't know how much they're spending to paint over these after they after the FDOT put these decorative crosswalks and it's just an absurdity.

And, you know, the problem that I have, whether it is if they've passed new state laws, fine.

But don't apply them retroactively.

It's wasteful it cause it's causing a lot of problems for municipalities all over the state.

It's making our cities less safe because these crosswalks are a safety enhancement, and it's the whole thing is just so ridiculous.

And I think most people are recognizing that this is government waste.

And anybody who cares about crosswalk uniformity didn't seem to care at all about it until we were started doing decorative crosswalks for pedestrian safety.

>>You know, a lot of people want to make this political, namely the governor.

But this is very personal.

What you've seen from the Orlando community respons to this, this organic rallying behind this rainbow crosswalk, it is very deeply personal.

Certainly for thos most impacted by this tragedy, the families and survivors.

>>The governor said today, Tuesday that this wasn't a political thing.

That's just a new law.

And the state has to enforce the law under the new law says that you can' have this kind of roadway art.

>>Well, as usual, the governor is now resorting to deliberate lies to defend his indefensible, state-sanctioned vandalis of the Pulse nightclub memorial.

He's lying.

There is no state law, no is there any new state guideline that requires this type of callousness and cruelty from the state of Florida.

In fact, the Florida Department of Transportation, in their first memorandum, outlined the process under which municipalities could request an exception that they would determin based on their own discretion.

They very clearly outlined that process, but they never afforded the city of Orlando the opportunity to appeal or to push back.

The fact that the state decided to do this in the middle of the night without notifying the city and the community tells us a couple things.

First, that they kne what they were doing was wrong, and also that they feared that the community would resist this overtly political act of depravity that the governor has engaged with.

But they have done that.

Now.

The community is resisting in many ways.

>>Democratic State Senator Carlos Guillermo-Smith and Orlando City Commissioner Patty Sheehan.

You can find links to FDOT's new design manual, Transportation Secretary Duffy's letter to governor and the bill passed by lawmakers this year that deals with this issue on our website wucf.org/newsnight.

Well, let's bring in our panel now to break it all down.

And joining us in the studio this week, Steven Lemongello senior editor at the Orlando Sentinel.

Good to see you Steve.

>>Happy to be here.

>>A lot of politic to talk about.

>>A little bit.

>>As usual.

I feel I always say that to you.

Donovan Myrie from WKMG News 6.

Good to see you, Donovan.

>>Nice to see you, sir.

>>Thanks for being here today.

And Cheryn Stone from Central Florida Public Media, good to see you Sharon.

You host the Engage show over there.

>>Ye and thanks for having me back.

>>Thank you so much for coming on.

Donovan let me just start with you on this one.

Just remind us how thing have evolved at the poll site.

You guys have had you your crews down there regularly.

What's the situation there now?

>>Is it colored?

Is it not colored?

Is it?

You know, it's gon back and forth.

I mean, I think the state has now painted ove that crosswalk twice.

People will go back and use chalk to fill it in, and they're still getting rid of it.

So it's kind of even though we've seen police out there and people at police have said, please don't, you know, block the streets and things.

It's still kind of going on.

All this stems from Secretary Duffy's letter, which was back in July 1s gave states 60 days to comply.

That 60 days kind of, you know, runs out September 3rd, which is basically next week.

And it's this idea of what's happening if you don't comply, what will happen to you.

And basically it's the threat of you're going to lose transportation money.

So what are you going to do?

You're stuc between a rock and a hard place.

You can't say, I'm going to throw away all my federal money over something like this and you've got a double whammy.

You've got the federal law and you've got the state law.

>>And of course, transportation dollars, as we've talked about many times on this show, a highly sought after from from the federal government.

What about the reaction then?

You guys at Central Florida Public Media have been talking to people.

We just heard Senato Smith and Commissioner, Sheehan, what have you guys been hearing?

>>It's been strong.

>>Yeah.

>>That reaction, it's been emotional for many people in th Orlando community.

It's not just about paint.

It's deeply hurtful.

Mayor Buddy Dyer called it cruel.

And I saw it in the video that you showed at the top of your show here.

You saw the messages and those people with the chalk came out almost immediately.

And some of the messages said, you can't erase us.

You cannot erase - erase our joy.

So it's just that sentiment continued to be heard over and over.

This isn't about urban planning.

This isn't about paint.

It's a deeply hurtful move.

>>The state's given Orlando a list of other crosswalks and intersections, right.

That it says need to be changed.

We know - what do we know about those and what the city is doing now?

>>Yeah, the city is basically and has already started like, you know, covering ove 14 of those.

I think four of them are actuall in the county they claim.

So that' a whole thing about that.

And you have things including swans, Lake Eola's fountain like a beautiful sort of centerpiece mid intersection mura that was done by an artist who, you know, got grants to do it.

And you're seeing it also in other counties.

Seminole is starting to paint over some of its, its green you know, bike lane crosswalks.

>>It's nothing safe.

The biggest one I think the biggest surprise was, what's going to happen in Tampa?

They have a giant mural outside-- >>Back the blue.

Yes.

>>Yeah.

Outside of their police headquarters that is slated to be painted over as well.

>>And we've also seen those, checkered flags near the Daytona Speedway also-- >>Those are gone.

>>Get painted over as well.

We heard Commissioner Sheehan there say that this new law shouldn' apply retroactively to artwork that's sort of already been installed with, I guess, permission from the state.

But she concedes that her sid is unlikely to prevail in this.

There doesn't seem to be a whole lot that municipalities can do, right?

>>Yeah, legally speaking, municipalities like Orlando, they're just in a really tough spot here.

The new state law gives the Florida Department of Transportatio this broad authority to enforce compliance with these stricter design standards.

And even though citie like Orlando we've been talking about originally got permission to install these crosswalks, FDOT as you mentioned is applying the rules retroactively so citie don't have much leverage here.

FDOT already warned if they don't comply, the state' going to come in paint over it, and then you're going to get the bill anyway.

And if the city resists, we talked about this already.

The state can withhold funding for these critical projects and infrastructure.

And there is one optio for cities to request a hearing with FDOT.

But they made it clear there going to be no exceptions.

So that would pretty much be a procedural move.

>>Yeah, I mean, the Sentinel said in its reporting that the, the, the state does seem to have had a fairly rapid change in policy on this artwork and that the FDOT actually boosted the idea of multicolored crosswalks just recently.

>>Oh, yeah, there's all sorts of various social media posts and web pages that were FDOT is celebrating like, golly look at those great crosswalks.

Look at all these great art.

Look at how safe things are going to be now.

The, the one in, Lake Nona was, you know they celebrated these two kids, you know, won the design you know, competition for that.

And they were the ones who were able to who got their artwork put on the street there.

Basically this seems to have all started with, Sean Duffy, the, transportation federal transportation secretary, tweeting how he just doesn't like, you know, political quote, unquote, you know, crosswalk things and that, that he mentioned rainbows and after that, all of a sudde that Florida flipped on a dime and all these things they wer celebrating us are now targeted.

And the very first thing they painted over, which is probably sent some sort of message, if you look at it that way, wa the rainbow crosswalk.

>>Yeah.

You alluded to this before, Cheryn, that it's Orlando is far from the only place in the state.

And the governo has had some pointed criticism for other areas Key West, Delray Beach and so on.

>>Yeah you mentioned Tampa, Sarasota, Boynton Beach, and they're all part of thi broader effort across the state.

And the thing is, FDO is framing it as a safety issue.

So they're citing these national traffic guidelines and this push for uniformity.

>>There is a national aspect to this, of course, because this comes from the transportation secretary.

Are there indications that rainbows and other art in other parts of the countr might also face the same fate?

>>There are indications, but nobody has moved.

Nobody has made a move on this, to start painting over crosswalk, basically.

Florida, is is the vanguard, you know, the the litmus test, I guess, for this.

We did see one report in Lexington, Kentucky, where they basically said, come at me, bro.

Good luck.

They're not they're not budging on this.

We've seen a report from Bloomberg Philanthropies that said, basically, in some of the intersections they had studied on asphalt art, that accidents had actually gone down, crashes had actually been reduced.

So this idea of it's a safety issue, it really kind of doesn't hold up that argument.

>>I mean, what about that?

Because I mentioned the, the, the whole, cultural issue before is Donovan mentioned it seems that Florida is often at the vanguard of culture wars.

Right.

It's just another example.

>>Yeah.

Like, a lot of what we're seeing nationally, out of Washington now is stuff that started to break right here in, in Florida, especially, the Don't Say Gay thing from 21-22 has just sort of, sort of this, this, this the beginning of what you're now seeing, you know, in the DC when it comes to, you know, gay rights issue and sort of the sort of erasing of a lot of things like the Harvey Milk, you know, naval ship being, you know, renamed and things like that.

>>Yeah.

And the crosswalk painting, Steve, isn't the only criticism that the governor's received right from the local LGBTQ community when it comes to Pulse.

>>Yeah, I think of his first year as governor.

He put out a statemen initially that did not mention, the LGBTQ community or Hispanics.

And back then they quickly apologized, it was a mistake, a staffer did it, and he went to the next day to Pulse and was, you know, made amends.

And, those two groups are mentioned in every, you know, statement sinc by the governor until this year.

And suddenly, just like that, those two groups disappeared from the statement and no, no apologies.

No whoops There was a mistake like that.

They can do it now.

>>What happens now going forwar in terms of how we cover this.

You guys going to keep on this story.

You're going to keep sending crews down to Pulse?

>>Yeah.

I you know we are, we're you know, this is a story we've all been invested in.

I mean, every media outlet in Orlando has been invested in Pulse since it happened.

And, this is of high interest.

This is a story that's a national story.

It's an international story.

You know, people are somewhat flabbergasted b what's going on down in Florida.

So we will continue to see it.

And it's not just Orlando, it's Cocoa.

It's Volusia.

It's all over the place.

>>Yo can find more of my interviews with Commissioner Sheehan and Senator Smith on our website, wucf.org/newsnight.

Meanwhile, tell us what you think about the crosswalk controversy.

Join us on social media, we're at WUCFTV on Facebook and Instagram.

We're also @NewsNightWUCF on X.

Well, it was following the Pulse shooting in 2016 and the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Dougla High School in Parkland in 2018 that the Florida Legislature passed a suite of new law aimed at curbing gun violence, among the a minimum age requirement of 21 for purchasing rifles and other long guns in the state.

Federal law sets the age to buy a handgun at 21 nationwide.

The NRA has been fighting Florida's law, arguin it violates the Second Amendment rights of 18 to 20 year old adults.

It's asking the US Supreme Court to weigh in with lower courts divided on the issue.

What surprised many court watchers, though, is Florida's response.

Attourney General James Uthmeier last week filed a response urging the Supreme Court not only to hear the case, but to strike down Florida's own law.

I talked this week with John Comerford, executive director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action.

>>Well, Attorney General Uthmeier come into this offic and taken a look at at some of the law that are problematic in the state of Florida.

And this is one of them.

We saw this under governor DeSantis calling for the legislature to put this bill on his desk.

That didn't happen this legislative session.

This case is already headed to the Supreme Court.

And what we see here is, is the leadership from the elected state officials in the state of Florida to try to right this wrong.

And we're really happy to see that come through.

It is unprecedented, and we're very optimistic that the Supreme Court will take this case.

>>You can find more from my interview with John Comerfor from the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action on ou website wucf.org/Newsnight.

Donovan, just outline what the NRA is, is asking the Supreme Court to do here and why the state would argue against its own law as unconstitutional.

>>Basically, what it comes down to is this law was passed after Parkland.

Basically it said, you know, 18 to 20 year olds should not be abl to purchase a rifle or, an assault weapon, basically, a long gun-- >>The kinds that are often used in these-- >>Right.

And that was used in parkland.

Now we've gone to the NRA is challenging this and it all kind of hinges on a Supreme Court decision from a couple of years ago, back in 2022.

This is New York State Rifle and Pistol Association versus Bruen, where the Supreme Court included a standard that gun restriction must be consistent with, quote, nation, the nation's historical tradition of regulating firearms.

And I think that's where the NRA thinks they have an opening in this.

Now for Florida to say, go ahead.

We're not going to challenge this.

It's almost as if they're just basically opening the door.

>>Yeah.

Well, let's talk a little bi more about the the Bruen cases.

Donovan just mentioned Florida's brief cites the Supreme Court's decision i that 2022 New York State Rifle and Pistol Association versus Bruen.

And that decision, as he mentioned, set a standar that gun restrictions in the US must align with, quote, the nation's historical tradition when it comes to firearm regulation.

The 11th circuit US Court of Appeals has already ruled that the Florida age limit law meets that standard.

But Luis Valdez, Florida state director for Gun Owners of America, told me this week he thinks the Supreme Court will disagree.

>>I'm very confident the Supreme Court will see it our way because there's actually a circuit court split.

Other circuits have ruled that the under 21 purchase ba is unconstitutional and had no historical basis especially with the Bruen decision of history text and tradition.

There is no historical analogy going back to the founding of this country, that there was an age restricted on the purchase of firearms and including Florida's open carry law.

There's no historical analogy banning open carr either goes back to the founding of this country, because the very militiamen open carry their muskets to challenge the British in Lexington and Concord.

They didn't carry five foot long muskets in their pocket.

>>Louis Valdez there.

Steve might that precedent that in Bruen and other recent decisions I guess by the justices on which cases to take up might that give us an indication of whether or not they'll take up Florida's age restriction law?

>>Yeah, the US Supreme Court, even before it got even more conservative in the last few years, basicall has just been been doing this, you know, over the last decad or so, they've been slowly whittling away at you know, gun laws, you know, throughout the country both in DC, in New York just recently, like you mentioned, and there's it seems every indication that, you know, when you get sort of get the hint from the, the, the NRA people and that the gun rights peopl that this is where that's going.

>>Yeah.

I mean, the Florida legislature's already loosened, a number of gun restrictions, but has failed to move on several other demands from groups like the NR and the Gun Owners of America.

Let's hear again from Luis Valdez on the legislative record of Florida Republicans.

>>Gun Owners of America commends, Florida's attorney genera for taking the stance.

And at the same time, we are appalle that the Republican led legislature refuses to repeal such an unconstitutional law.

The fact that the A has to fight our own legislature to repeal such an unconstitutional act is just tantamount to how wrong things are here in Florida when it comes to constitutional liberties.

>>Steve, I mean, Republicans really divide on this issue and could the state support for the NRA's push at the Supreme Court, you know, be a wa for the DeSantis administration to circumvent the legislature, which has shown some some hesitancy on this issue?

>>Yeah, a lot of attempts in the past to sort of, weaken, you know, gun laws have sort of run into obstacles, you know, in the Senate, especially as you know, moderate Republicans, even conservative Republicans, does not seem to gotten past them.

And, you saw that, this actually did this past, in 2018 after Parkland, like, there was that was Republican controlled legislature back then.

A lot of those people are some of those people are still there, some of them in different, different roles, House to Senate, things like that.

So they're still there.

They remember this.

This was only about six years ago, that there was this great outcry after Parkland to to sort of prevent this sort of thing.

So and that has bee the obstacle and it seems that, you know, with Meyer and DeSantis and, you know, other, you know, gun rights groups have have found a way to get around that obstacle.

>>And of course, we're talkin about this against the backdrop of a another mass shooting, this time in Minnesota.

Well, despite the frustrations of some on the right of the pace of change, Florida Democrats haven't managed to get what they want on guns through the legislature in recent years, either.

Let's hear from state Senator Carlos Guillermo Smith again, I asked him about the AGs filing.

>>He's saying that he won' enforce that part of the law.

That's a dereliction of duty.

It's a derelictio of our humanity as a state.

And the promise that we made to those Parkland families after the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas, that we will do everything that we could to sto that from ever happening again.

There's a reason why we raise the age to buy a military style assault weapon from 18 to 21.

It's because the shooter at parkland was 19 years old.

We made a commitment tha this would never happen again.

Now, the state of Florida under DeSantis, his leadership, because he appointed this attorney general who was not elected by the people, want to reverse that progress.

They want to fight for 18 year olds to put their hands on military style assault weapons again.

Who are they fighting for?

The gun manufacturers, the NRA?

They're certainly not fightin for everyday working families.

>>Senator Carlos Guillermo Smith.

Cheryn what have we heard from, gun violence prevention groups as the Supreme Court sort of decides whether to take this up?

>>They've been very critical and vocal of the NRA's challenge, but also of Florida Attorney General Uthmeier's decision to no defend the state's own law.

Brady is one of thos leading gun safety organizations nationally.

They filed a briefin urging the state Supreme Court or the Supreme Court not to take the case and they argue that Florida's restriction is constitutional.

And they brought up some what they called common sense science that shows young adults under 21 are still developing in ways that impact decision making and impulse control.

And they also emphasize tha this was a bipartisan response after the tragedy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, and has already been effective in reducing gun deaths and March for Our Lives, founded by parklan survivors went it even further.

And they called the Attorney General's actions a betrayal.

>>It does seem that that gun laws are much more politically challenging nowadays for lawmakers to pass than they were in 2018.

Do we know, though?

I mean, the politician seem to have evolved a little.

Do we know how the public feels about it?

>>Pew Research Center, they did a study.

Most Americans still believe we have a problem with violent crime.

We have a problem with, gun violence.

Gallup poll last year reinforce that most Americans believe there should be a ba on the sale of assault weapons.

Interestingly, though, when it comes to handguns, it's about a 50/50 split.

You know, most people believ you should be able to have them.

Some people believe you shouldn't.

And then it's that idea of, you know, should you be able to defend yourself?

Yes.

But should everybody who is capable of having a gun have a gun?

No.

So the public is a kind of back and forth on handguns, but I think there's a very, clear path of, you know, they don't want assault rifles, assault weapons to be sold.

>>Presumably, if the Supreme Court, makes a decision on Florida's law that has ripple effects for a lot of other states.

>>Yeah, I think this is well beyond just a Florida issue.

It could I think you can safely say it could reshape how America regulate access to guns for young people.

What the implications of this move if the Supreme Court takes up the case and rules in favor of the NRA, I think that you'll see it extend beyond Florida.

I think it could trigger other challenges to similar laws in dozens of other states.

>>Now, of course, the NRA says that, just because you're 18 doesn't mean you should have fewer constitutional rights, than if you're 21.

That's generally the pushback you'll find, as I mentioned, more from my interview with, John Commerford from the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action on our website, wucf.org/newsnight.

But that is all the time we have for this week.

My thanks to Stephen Lemongello, Donovan Myrie, Cheryn Stone, thanks so much for coming in, guys.

Thank you for conversation today.

We'll see you next Friday night at 8:30 here on WUCF.

In the meantime for all of us here at NewsNight.

Take care and have a great week.