Florida Governor Ron DeSantis made headlines during a June 11, 2025 appearance on The Rubin Report when he discussed Florida’s controversial HB1 law. Passed in 2021, the legislation was designed to address public demonstrations, rioting, and roadway safety after a wave of large-scale protests across the country. DeSantis framed the law as a necessary protection for both public order and individuals who might find themselves in dangerous situations involving large crowds.
In his remarks, DeSantis specifically highlighted a provision of the law related to drivers who encounter protesters blocking the road. He stated, “If someone surrounds your vehicle and you believe your life is at risk, you can get out—even if someone gets hurt.” The governor suggested that the law empowers ordinary citizens to defend themselves if they feel threatened, reinforcing his stance on prioritizing safety and self-defense in public spaces.
HB1 does indeed contain language that provides civil immunity for drivers who unintentionally injure or kill someone while trying to flee from what is legally defined as a riot. The intent, according to lawmakers who supported the bill, was to protect people from being criminally or financially ruined when caught in a hostile or violent crowd. Supporters argue that the measure is an important safeguard against mob violence and road blockades that can escalate quickly.
However, DeSantis’ framing of the law has drawn pushback from legal experts and critics. Attorneys and scholars were quick to clarify that HB1 does not grant blanket immunity for drivers. The law requires that drivers genuinely believe their lives are in danger and that their actions are proportionate to the threat. If prosecutors determine that a driver acted recklessly or used unnecessary force, the individual could still face serious criminal charges, such as reckless driving, assault, or even vehicular homicide.
Critics argue that the governor’s interpretation risks oversimplifying the complexities of the law and could encourage reckless behavior by drivers who believe they have full immunity. Civil rights advocates also warn that such messaging may discourage peaceful protest by instilling fear that demonstrators can be harmed without accountability. They emphasize the importance of balancing public safety with the constitutional right to assemble and express dissent.
In the end, the debate over HB1 underscores the broader national conversation around protest rights, self-defense laws, and government responsibility in times of social unrest. While DeSantis maintains that HB1 protects Floridians from dangerous scenarios, opponents believe the law’s ambiguity could cause more harm than good. The controversy highlights the ongoing struggle to reconcile public safety with the protection of civil liberties in a politically divided climate.
