Disney World vs. DeSantis (Trial Scheduling Update)
Walt Disney World is suing Ron DeSantis and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District (CFTOD) board members that the Florida Governor appointed. This post covers allegations of the lawsuit, plus developments from the meeting of the CFTOD that precipitated this litigation. (Updated June 28, 2023.)
It’s been a relatively quiet month in the battle of Disney vs. DeSantis, probably in part because the presidential aspirant is focusing his campaign on highly-educated and libertarian-leaning New Hampshire and culture wars don’t play as well there as, say, Iowa. In part, it’s also because the wheels of justice grind slowly, so there isn’t going to be big breaking news about this as often as, say, changes to the Genie+ service.
To the latter point, the court scheduling briefing is in for the lawsuit. Disney is requesting a trial date in July 2024, whereas DeSantis is seeking an August 2025 trial. Obviously, a year-plus gap is pretty significant. More notably, Disney’s date is in the lead-up to the 2024 presidential election, whereas the DeSantis date is after that. Let’s start by breaking that down…
First of all, neither of these requests are unreasonable. Given the complexity of the case and its many moving parts, Disney’s timeline is a bit aggressive or expedited, whereas DeSantis’s is a bit on the slow side–but neither request strikes me as glaringly atypical. Either way, this case will be brought to resolution faster than Disney has filled in EPCOT’s Giant Dirt Pit.
It’s a common refrain that the American justice system moves too slowly–and there’s certainly room for improvement. However, there’s also the reality that cases are more complex than they appear to laypeople, and there’s good reason for the methodical pace–especially when more than two parties are involved. Discovery, depositions, and other pretrial motions all take time to schedule and complete, and those 30-day response windows (assuming no motions to extend) quickly add up.
From my perspective, these requested trial dates simply reaffirm our past commentary about this case and the whole standoff between the state and Disney. The company wants this over as quickly as possible, as they “lose” the longer that the case drags on and continues to make headlines. We’ve already seen that with Disney’s Reputation Falling Further in public opinion polling.
By contrast, DeSantis likely wants to drag this fight out while it’s politically advantageous during the GOP primary. (Those in the pro-Disney “bubble” may underestimate just how well this is playing with Republican voters, with a clear majority supporting DeSantis in this battle against Disney per polling.)
However, that’s only true of polling among the base. If DeSantis ends up campaigning for the general election, he will pivot on this, as polling also shows that it’s a loser among the broader population. That means not trumpeting his fight with companies, and certainly trying to avoid headlines about being in court with them right during the heart of campaign season.
In my view, that’s what both of these scheduling requests reflect. Once again, it’s about optics above all else. Disney seeking an accelerated schedule is not necessarily conclusive of confidence in their case–it’s about wanting to put it in the rearview mirror as expeditiously as possible. DeSantis wanting to delay isn’t due to fears that he’ll fail in court–it’s about concerns that the case itself will damage his election prospects. (Aside from pride, winning or losing here is almost immaterial to him–there are no meaningful consequences.)
Prior to the scheduling development, this month’s other major development is that Judge Mark E. Walker recused himself. He disqualified himself due to a relative within the third degree of relationship owns thirty shares of stock in Disney. As a result, the case has been reassigned to Judge Allen C. Winsor. This is a meaningful development because Walker was generally viewed as more favorable to Disney based on recent decisions.
Additionally, Walt Disney Parks & Resorts filed its First Amended Complaint last month. In that, Disney argues that the recently-passed and signed into law Senate Bill 1604 was drafted such that it would target only contracts between Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID) and the Walt Disney Company.
Disney contends that “Governor DeSantis and his allies have no apparent intent to moderate their retaliatory campaign any time soon,” and the amended complaint cites several (additional) instances of Florida politicians advancing the legislation voluntarily admitting that they were targeting Walt Disney World, punishing the company for its speech, and using them to set an example for other companies.
The amended complaint also takes aim at an amendment added to a Senate transportation bill (later substituted as House Bill 1305) that would give the state the ability to regulate, and even shut down, the Walt Disney World monorail system. “The proposed amendment was precision-engineered to target Disney alone…imposing state oversight over only those private monorail systems located ‘within an independent special district created by local act which have boundaries within two contiguous counties,” the lawsuit alleges. “Disney is the only company affected by House Bill 1305.”
Beyond the additional legislation, Disney pointed to statements made by DeSantis during a press conference commemorating the end of the Florida Legislative session. After being asked about how he was “handling” the Reedy Creek situation, without hesitation or prompting, Governor DeSantis admitted: “[T]his all started, of course,with our parents’ rights bill.”
The lawsuit further alleges that “Governor DeSantis trumpeted the unequivocal intent and perceived success of his retribution campaign: ‘Since our skirmish last year, Disney has not been involved in any of those issues. They have not made a peep. That, ultimately, is the most important, that Disney is not allowed to pervert the system to the detriment of Floridians.'”
In terms of commentary about the amended complaint, we’ll reiterate that the punishment is the point. It may seem like a comedy of errors with DeSantis and his allies are giving the game away with these dozens of public statements that they’re retaliating against Walt Disney World with this legislation as it weakens their legal position.
In reality, that’s the entire end game. Had Governor DeSantis woken up one day in early 2020 and come to the conclusion that RCID needed to be eliminated or replaced for some boring procedural or administrative reason, no one would have cared. Walt Disney World might have lobbied against it, and the local newspapers and fan-centric blogs would’ve picked up the story, but it would not be making the nightly news on a regular basis for over a year. The vast majority of the public wouldn’t hear about it, and probably wouldn’t have an opinion even if they did.
This is only making the mainstream news and raising the profile of Governor DeSantis because it’s controversial. There’s literally no other reason why this is a major story. The retaliatory angle and what people think of that, for better or worse, is it.
As noted in the amended complaint, DeSantis recently boasted about how Disney has “not made a peep” since the skirmish last year. That’s certainly a clever card for him to play, intimating that he’s won in the way that counts most. However, I suspect that he would actually far prefer Disney clumsily voicing opinions on more pending Florida legislation, as that would give him more red meat for the base. (And to be sure, Bob Iger has responded to DeSantis’s statements and actions, and the amended complaint’s allegations also serve as statements, but some of that is probably better left ignored.)
Turning back to the original complaint, we’ll start with the CFTOD meeting that precipitated Walt Disney World filing suit against the governor and board. During this meeting, the new district’s Board of Supervisors declared that the Development Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants entered into by and between the (former) Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID) and Walt Disney Parks & Resorts was void and unenforceable.
The new CFTOD board asserted that these agreements between Disney and RCID–which made national news for use of the “King Charles Clause” and other fanciful expressions–rendered them powerless to offer any oversight over Walt Disney World’s tourist district, effectively undermining their very name. They’ve repeatedly called these eleventh-hour, last-minute, or clandestine covenants that were made unlawfully, that they have numerous legal deficiencies, and were a subversion of the will of Florida voters, among many other claims.
The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District Board of Supervisors also approved the “Superior Authority” amendment at the same meeting today. This essentially does what the name suggests, giving the new board final decision-making authority for the District and declaring that no further administrative appeal is available for decisions made by said board.
The new board chair argued during the meeting that Disney was the one to pick this fight with his board,” and claimed that the board was not looking for a fight. But also that, factually and legally, what Disney created is an “absolute legal mess, and will not work.” With that, the board approved findings by its general counsel, declared the company’s February 8 agreements with RCID legally void and unenforceable, and moved to have them stricken from the public records of Osceola and Orange Counties.
That brings us to the juicier development, which is that Walt Disney Parks & Resorts has filed suit against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. In addition, also names Meredith Ivey, Acting Secretary of the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity; as well as Central Florida Tourism Oversight District Board Members: Martin Garcia, Michael Sasso, Brian Aungst, Ron Peri, Bridget Ziegler, and Administrator John Classe.
In the 77-page lawsuit filed with the U.S. District Court for Northern District of Florida, Disney Parks & Resorts alleges “a targeted campaign of government retaliation—orchestrated at every step by Governor DeSantis as punishment for Disney’s protected speech—now threatens Disney’s business operations, jeopardizes its economic future in the region, and violates its constitutional rights.”
“Today’s action is the latest strike: At the Governor’s bidding, the State’s oversight board has purported to “void” publicly noticed and duly agreed development contracts, which had laid the foundation for billions of Disney’s investment dollars and thousands of jobs. This government action was patently retaliatory, patently anti-business, and patently unconstitutional,” Disney alleges in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit continues: “…the Governor and his allies have made clear they do not care and will not stop. The Governor recently declared that his team would not only ‘void the development agreement’–just as they did today–but also planned ‘to look at things like taxes on the hotels,’ ‘tolls on the roads,’ ‘developing some of the property that the district owns’ with ‘more amusement parks,’ and even putting a ‘state prison’ next to Walt Disney World. ‘Who knows? I just think the possibilities are endless,’ [Florida Governor DeSantis] said.”
“Disney regrets that it has come to this. But having exhausted efforts to seek a resolution, the Company is left with no choice but to file this lawsuit to protect its cast members, guests, and local development partners from a relentless campaign to weaponize government power against Disney in retaliation for expressing a political viewpoint unpopular with certain State officials.”
“Governor DeSantis and his allies paid no mind to the governing structure that facilitated Reedy Creek’s successful development until one year ago, when the Governor decided to target Disney. There is no room for disagreement about what happened here: Disney expressed its opinion on state legislation and was then punished by the State for doing so.”
“Governor DeSantis announced that Disney’s statement had ‘crossed the line’ —a line evidently separating permissible speech from intolerable speech—and launched into a barrage of threats against the Company in immediate response,” the lawsuit continues. It further alleges that DeSantis and his allies have since “moved beyond threats to official action, employing the machinery of the State in a coordinated campaign to damage Disney’s ability to do business in Florida.”
The lawsuit points out that state leaders have “not been subtle” about their reasons for taking retaliatory action against Disney. DeSantis and co. have declared that Disney “deserves” this because of the substance of the company’s statements.
Disney further states that it never sought a fight with the Florida government, and attempt to de-escalate for nearly a year, attempting a productive dialogue with DeSantis, all to no avail. Against that backdrop of uncertainty, Disney and RCID gave public notice that the parties would enter into contracts to secure future development for Walt Disney World. The company alleges that those contracts implemented a comprehensive plan for RCID that DeSantis had found compliant with Florida law only months earlier.
Disney characterized the developer agreement as standard and unsurprising, consistent with other land use agreements between developers and local regulars. The company contends that, “contrary to misunderstandings and mischaracterizations,” they do not undermine the CFTOD’s ability to govern and exercise its authority.
Disney argues that it is a clear violation of the company’s rights for the CFTOD board to declare its own legally binding contracts void and unenforceable, and as such, Disney seeks relief to carry out its long-held business plans.
The company further contends that it is “forced to defend itself against a State weaponizing its power to inflict political punishment” as a “clear violation of Disney’s federal constitutional rights” under the Contracts Clause, Takings Clause, Due Process Clause, and the First Amendment.”
“Disney finds itself in this regrettable position because it expressed a viewpoint the Governor and his allies did not like. Disney wishes that things could have been resolved a different way. But Disney also knows that it is fortunate to have the resources to take a stand against the State’s retaliation—a stand smaller businesses and individuals might not be able to take when the State comes after them for expressing their own views. In America, the government cannot punish you for speaking your mind.”
Deeper in the lawsuit, the company cites dozens of examples of Governor DeSantis voluntarily admitting that he was retaliating against Disney for expressing disfavored viewpoints. It cites his campaign emails soliciting donations, public interviews and speeches, social media posts, and even DeSantis’s recent memoir.
There are countless examples of this–they form the bulk of the 77-page complaint. Even as someone who has been following this saga closely and heard the heated rhetoric, some of the statements made by DeSantis and his allies are absurdly inflammatory and downright unsettling. Stuff I’d expect to hear from Jonah Ryan, not real politicians.
Ultimately, Disney seeks that the court declare that the Legislative Declaration is unlawful and unenforceable because it abrogates Disney’s rights in violation of the Contracts Clause, Takings Clause, Due Process Clause, and because it was enacted in retaliation for Disney’s speech in violation of the First Amendment.
Disney further seeks that the court declare that the Development Agreement (etc.) remain in effect and enforceable, that Florida Senate Bill 4C and House Bill 9B are unlawful and unenforceable because they were enacted in retaliation for Disney’s political speech in violation of the First Amendment, and that the Defendants be enjoined from enforcing the aforementioned bills and Legislative Declaration.
In a nutshell, Walt Disney World is seeking to undo the renaming of the Reedy Creek Improvement District into the Central Florida Tourism Oversight Development District, which would by extension result in the replacement of the DeSantis appointees on that board.
Additionally or alternatively, Disney is seeking to preserve the Development Agreement (etc.) from February 8, and to prevent Florida from taking further action to supersede those contracts or otherwise punish the company.
Other politicians have spoken out about the battle between Disney and DeSantis, including members of the governor’s own party. An interesting piece in the Wall Street Journal shared that some Republicans are saying privately that the governor’s approach looks increasingly like a personal vendetta and heavy-handed government intervention into the affairs of one of the state’s largest employers. The paper also pointed out that DeSantis has seen erosion in support among GOP state lawmakers as result, with several allies from Florida’s congress publicly endorsing former President Trump.
“Disney is really acting in a way that we’d expect most free-market actors would act. Companies always push back and find a way to respond to aggressive regulation,” Republican state Rep. Spencer Roach, told the WSJ. “I think the governor is right, but I’m not sure at this point that the public is with us, and I would urge the governor to be cautious as he goes on with this fight with Disney.”
This is notable because Roach was one of the earliest advocates of the Reedy Creek dissolution, helping to spearhead the legislation early-on. (He’s cited twice in Disney’s complaint!) So it’s particularly interesting to see he and other once-vocal critics of Disney go quiet or publicly distance themselves from the ongoing battle.
Less surprising is the reaction of others against whom DeSantis will square off in the 2024 GOP presidential primary. Trump weighed in by saying that DeSantis “is being absolutely destroyed by Disney” and called the governor’s move a “political stunt.” He hasn’t commented on the latest development, but he’ll undoubtedly seize upon the lawsuit at some point.
Nikki Haley weighed in and said that her home state would “happily accept” if Disney wanted to move its hundreds of thousands of jobs to South Carolina and bring billions of dollars in revenue with them, noting that South Carolina is “not woke, but we’re not sanctimonious about it either.” She is just one of several 2024 candidates who have commented thus far.
It should go without saying, but Walt Disney World is not going to pack up and move to another state–this isn’t Theme Park Tycoon. Haley and other politicians don’t think they will, either. As with so much of this, it’s theatrics or political posturing. By all accounts, the company is playing the long game with an eye towards its long-term future in Florida.
Nevertheless, it’s interesting to see other Republicans distancing themselves from DeSantis on this issue, or smelling blood in the water. Our commentary on two different past posts (here and here) largely revolved around that angle of the battle, questioning whether DeSantis has overplayed his hand, or made a miscalculation in continuing to push this once Iger returned.
It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out from here. Now that the battle between Disney and DeSantis has escalated beyond the court of public opinion to an actual court, the eventual outcome should be more predictable as a matter of law. Even then, this probably isn’t as cut and dry as some analysts are making it out to be.
We’d also caution against premature conclusions about how the ‘political theater’ side of the standoff will continue. One thing that has been particularly telling throughout this saga is that DeSantis and his allies have not at all attempted to maintain a veneer of plausible deniability.
No matter where you stand on this debate, it’s patently obvious that taking away Reedy Creek was occurring in direct response to Chapek’s statements last spring about pending Florida legislation. But for Chapek voicing an opinion, no one on DeSantis’s side of the aisle would’ve introduced legislation to replace the Reedy Creek Improvement District.
Additionally, no matter what you think of him, DeSantis is an intelligent and savvy political operator. It’s not like he (repeatedly) misspoke and accidentally let the underlying motivation for all of this slip. The punishment was the point, and signaling the same to supporters–and other businesses–was purposeful and deliberate.
This story never would’ve dominated the national news if Florida simply dissolved or replaced Reedy Creek during legislature’s ordinary course of business, with the simple explanation that more government oversight was desired. It would’ve been boring and no one would’ve cared. Framing it as retaliation was necessary for campaigning, fundraising, and making television appearances.
There’s no reason to expect that Walt Disney World filing this lawsuit will change the calculus for DeSantis and friends. In all likelihood, they will only escalate further, not de-escalate or defer now that there’s an actual pending legal matter. Just as the punishment was the point, so too is the battle the point.
Even as Disney is using the statements of the governor and board members in support of its allegations, the aforementioned individuals do not have any legal incentive to quiet down and let this matter be resolved by the courts. Disney is suing DeSantis and the CFTOD board in their official capacities. They have nothing to lose, personally, by continuing to plead their case and make waves in public. The only thing that will change the approach is if continuing the fight with Disney polls poorly.
As we’ve said before, this is not about the law, passing meaningful legislation, the tough and thankless work of local governance, or doing what’s best for constituents. It’s simply self-serving political theater. When viewed through that prism, “winning” is more about the ongoing culture wars than it is as a matter of law. The goal isn’t to govern; it’s to grab headlines, dominate the news cycle, and score points with the base in the current era of politics as a team sport. Again, these are not serious people with sincere motivations.
Planning a Walt Disney World trip? Learn about hotels on our Walt Disney World Hotels Reviews page. For where to eat, read our Walt Disney World Restaurant Reviews. To save money on tickets or determine which type to buy, read our Tips for Saving Money on Walt Disney World Tickets post. Our What to Pack for Disney Trips post takes a unique look at clever items to take. For what to do and when to do it, our Walt Disney World Ride Guides will help. For comprehensive advice, the best place to start is our Walt Disney World Trip Planning Guide for everything you need to know!
YOUR THOUGHTS
If you’ve read all or part of Walt Disney World’s lawsuit against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis & Friends, what’s your take on the allegations and support thereof? Any reaction to the latest season of the Reedy Creek Improvement District drama? Hope this escalating battle starts to de-escalate soon so we can focus again on the fun of the parks? Keep the comments civil, and avoid personal attacks or perpetuating pointless culture wars. Respectfully debating the change is totally fine, but don’t attack others or troll for controversy. That’s why Facebook was invented.
“Free to express one’s opinion without fear of govt retaliation…”
Yet this is exactly what Conservatives & others who disagree with the MSM’s agenda have received over the past years – govt retaliation!
A peaceful pro-life protester who is raided & arrested at gunpoint to intimidate & threaten him because he is exercising his Constitutional rights to express his belief that unborn babies are precious. “Govt retaliation to free speech?”
Many J6 protestors who were peaceful & didn’t even enter the Capitol have been rotting in jail for 2 years while their Constitutional rights are being ignored simply because they expressed their belief that there was fraud in the 2020 elections. “Govt retaliation to free speech?”
Those that claim that a man cannot get pregnant & that according to science & biology there is no such thing as trans women, are shamed, risk losing their jobs & treated hatefully for their right to free speech.
Twitter at the behest of govt, unjustly & unconstitutionally censored & banned many voices they disagreed with starting with the 2020 elections & throughout the pandemic. “Retaliation for one expressing free speech?”
Yes, that is the ideal, to be free to express oneself without fear of govt retaliation, but that is not the reality. Either both sides are free to express themselves without retaliation, or neither side is…
We are entitled to free speech, not to hate speech. Unfortunately, many of your examples are either incorrect, or are the latter.
Maggie it seems your definition of hate speech is anything you disagree with. Please cease that rhetoric.
I am aware that this is the internet, and I’m unlikely to change anyone’s opinions on it. However, silence is tantamount to agreement, and I do not agree that the statement “There is no such thing as trans women” is not directly hateful and harmful to a large segment of people. I also do not believe it belongs here, but I respect that Tom is trying to allow for discussion on the matter at hand and that makes for some difficult judgment calls.
Hate speech and breaking and entering, trespassing on Government property and trying to overthrow a legal election are not “free speech” no matter how dumb the reasons are.
Hey, Tom, your gamble to open the comments section on this topic has been a success so far with eloquently stated opinions and civility! I’m glad for you, actually, and bravo, loyal Tourists!
It’s instructive to see that this (essentally) fan site has been so terribly infested wiith negative comments that really have nothing to do with the Disney experience. It is even more illustrative to see that very little that has been said has anything to do with the Disney experience. The objective view here would show that Disney World wasn’t broken and didn’t need fixing. But enter a dictatoriall personality, who had already worked with Disney and apparently had no issues thereunto – until he found out that he could make a certain part of America angry by going up against something we had all enjoyed without problems until recently. I am really surprised that has not been the vector of all this. But the cult that has arisen in America apparently always needs an anger catalyst – apparently more than it values a good time. That’s the real pity of all this. DeSantis is a political irrelevancy, but he has exposed much about who our fellow Disney customers are.
Small minded and thin skinned DeSantis and his sycophantic minions have attempted to retaliate against free speech with which they do not agree. It’s a flagrant violation of contracts and free speech rights and should be quickly righted by the court. DeSantis is showing you exactly what to expect if he seeks higher office.
Yes he will be fighting for parent’s rights and protecting individual rights from federal government over reach. Remember the Covid lockdown madness? If that is your definition of small minded then we have two very different definitions of that phrase.
He will be fighting for parents rights*
*So long as they aren’t gay, they don’t have gay children, or Gid forbid are trans.
He will be a dictator that is inclusive to what he likes and will continue to oppress everyone else. This was never about protecting children, or he’d have gone after the real groomers–churches. A quick Google search is all you need to find the most active groomers in this country’s history. Yet not a word about them?
I love the pickle hamburger, spot on.
I laughed over the picture placement too!
For those of your readers who aren’t legal nerds, it’s worth pointing out that Disney spared no expenses on its legal team and hired two top tier law firms, both of which are also known for having extensive political connections (and, disclosure, one of which I used to work for)— there are no MAGA lawyers (who would be willing to defend RDS’s blatantly unconstitutional actions) anywhere in America that will not be dramatically outgunned by the OMM-Wilmer collaboration—both in terms of intellect and work ethic. To use a Disney Parks analogy, it would be like pitting Space Mountain against Gadget’s Go Coaster for best rollercoaster.
I am not a legal nerd, so wanted to say I appreciated knowing this and got a good chuckle!
Thanks for the article and all the info. I looooove your choice of image in the article, hilarious!
As a PR move, this was brilliance on behalf of the DeSantis camp; they even clearly got a subscription to “There’s No Such Thing As Bad Publicity” monthly. Hoping the court rules in favor of Disney’s first amendment right to freedom of speech.
The entire anti-Disney move smells more like PR than a legal strategy. DeSantis needs to get his name in the news frequently, so he’s using this whole anti-woke anti-Disney feud for fundraising nationally. He gets to raise millions of dollars, and the cost of the lawsuit will be paid by the State of Florida.
For DeSantis there’s no downside here, win or lose. If he wins, he can beat his chest like an alpha male favored by GOP primary voters, and if he loses, he can be a martyr felled by the evil liberals.
The end result is DeSantis doesn’t care if the lawsuit wins or loses, as its main goals are to burnish his reputation with GOP primary voters and raise money.
I couldn’t agree with your assessment more. I lean more conservative and even I don’t like the guy, Disney threats notwithstanding. If this is the way he handles threats to his power, then I’m genuinely fearful of his ability to handle more sensitive matters with other world leaders should he actually end up in the White House; the true definition of a bully, IMHO.
And meanwhile the people in Florida are the ones who are actually paying for the cost of the lawsuit.
Thanks for this great summary. As a Disney fan, I wish there was an incentive for the DeSantis team to come to the table. I imagine they could fairly easily negotiate a solution with Disney that includes some public win for the government while securing Disney’s rights to run their business per the original agreements with Florida.
As a citizen, as long as corporations are considered legally a person with constitutionally protected rights, I strongly feel Disney MUST fight this legal battle. Regardless of my personal thoughts on the political stance that Disney took, allowing a precedent where a state government can legally go after a private company for political speech is absurd and perhaps the very last thing this divided nation needs.
I don’t quite understand who is buying into the political theater of this entirely unnecessary fight. It seems clear it is a losing war for DeSantis, even if he gains some crowd applause for some of the battles. GOP donors are running shy. The MAGA crowd may say they don’t like Disney content choices, but I’d bet a significant percentage are Disney content consumers and at least occasional park guests. Who is the intended audience for this political theater?
I have been waiting patiently for Disney to drop this lawsuit. The mouse will prevail.
This has been like a train wreck you can’t look away from.
Tbh I was wary in the last board meeting, Desantis’s board had lawyers lay out a kindof legal argument that looked a bit like a court case, but it wasn’t actually a courtroom, nobody was under oath to my knowledge, there was no judge or jury, no opportunity for Disney or the RCID to offer rebuttal, etc.
I don’t know if their points were valid or not, I’m no expert on Florida law, they might be. I did find it sneaky that they created something that kindof had the appearance of legal proceedings, without the actual responsibility that comes with a courtroom and a court case.
I’m going to see when a class action will be filed against Desantis and crew for loss of profits by shareholders. Are they immune from suits? Personal vendettas are never good.
Thanks for the news and analysis. “Superior Authority” reminds me of when Professor Umbrage declared herself “High Inquisitor of Hogwarts.” Not sure Disney had a choice but to appeal to the courts, even though they understand that legality is clearly tertiary to the governor’s strategy.
“Essentially, Disney is only seeking relief for what has transpired this month and not last year–despite pleading facts that could arguably give rise to a lot more.”
I was a bit surprised by this. I thought if, or rather when, a lawsuit was filed in this by either side, Disney would seek to invalidate the laws replacing RCID. If making First Amendment arguments, why not ask for remedy from all the retaliation?
Just to clarify, that was my initial analysis after skimming the complaint–I somehow missed that they *did* include the relevant Senate and House bills and quickly edited/updated the article within about 30 minutes of publishing (which should’ve been about ~90 minutes before your comment, but we have been having cache issues). Are you still seeing that line or the one that was above or below it?
(Sorry about the confusion!)
I am curious about this as well.
Late on this reply, but yes, it’s updated. I saw the Senate 4C bill reference, but didn’t Google it until after my post, when I realized I was probably wrong too. I guess the requested relief to not “enforce” the bills made it more confusing. I guess that’s the way to request it and let the court order how to undo what was already done, but it still seems a bit weird. It’s not like just not enforcing an unconstitutional criminal law or something. I guess this is truly unprecedented though.
I was going to reply to my comment when I saw I was wrong right away, but since it was still awaiting moderation approval, I wasn’t sure if trying to reply to it then would tear the fabric of the DisneyTouristBlog space-time continuum.
Get post. Thanks. I am rooting for Disney. DeSantis was way out of line with his threats. I work in a law firm. I wish I could read the 77 page complaint. It is probably very interesting. But whoever wins in the lower Court, this will go higher. Keep us posted, Tom.
If you haven’t found Disney’s complaint, here’s a link:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/26/politics/read-disney-desantis-lawsuit/index.html
Walt Disney Company did not just “speak out”against the proposed (at the time) Florida law to protect young children from being sexualized at a tender age. They said they would actively fight against the proposal becoming law. That is a very different thing than just speaking out.
I think DeSantis is doing the right thing to protect the children. I wish more governors were doing the same.
I have always loved Disney and have been a fan since I first went to Disneyland in 1960. They are entitled to their opinions but not to fight to sexualize children in my opinion.
Have you considered the possibility that no one isbtrying to “sexualize” children? That this is just conservative rhetoric against an easy target Christians fo not like, LGBTQ community? Under this lens, it’s quite simple why people, or a company, would oppose it. Especially one with the inclusive history of Disney.
Acknowledging that LGBTQ individuals exist is not “sexualizing children”. Children can grasp the idea of being in love; they can grasp the idea that people of the same sex can fall in love.
I just love this scene in Zootopia so much:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX6S4qOCYcU
I feel like it really applies to so many people these days.
That’s all I’ll say.
Tom, just wanted to thank you for the summary and the deft use of photography from your vast portfolio.
As this scenario evolves I look forward to a few more surprises. I really think this will have some wild unintended consequences. I am optimistic that I will enjoy the ride.
Although others have already commented on how apropos the photos are, I particularly enjoyed the judicious (rim shot!) deployment of Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride. Good show!
The last photo….the fruity dessert…hmmm, what am I missing?
It’s rare that I’m on a corporation’s side on something like this. I certainly don’t agree, for example, that money is speech and corporations should therefore be able to spend what they like on politics. But it’s impossible to deny that corporations do however have the right to make statements under the First Amendment. It’s hard to see what case DeSantis has here, given how obvious they’ve made it re: their motivations. Even the currently right-wing Supreme Court I imagine is most likely to side with Disney here. Plenty of right-leaning folks, who might have been ready to boycott Disney for stuff they said which they don’t agree with, are still going to hold the opinion that Disney can say what they want. So good luck to DeSantis… I think he’s going to need it.
“Plenty of right-leaning folks, who might have been ready to boycott Disney for stuff they said which they don’t agree with, are still going to hold the opinion that Disney can say what they want.”
This is the principled position.
Everyone on both sides of the aisle should ask themselves how they’d feel if a blue-state governor pursued legislation narrowly-tailored to raise taxes (or whatever) on only Chick-fil-a or Hobby Lobby for an opinion expressed by their CEO. Would that targeting be okay?
You can simultaneously believe that companies should stay out of politics–or disagree with the substance of a statement–while also believing as a matter of principle (and law) that companies and individuals have a right to express opinions with which you disagree without fear of government retaliation.
Yes to this comment. If individuals in an open and democratic society wish to boycott a business for statements made by its leadership, they’re free to do so. But for a government to participate in retaliatory bullying against a business for statements made by its leadership treads dangerously close to authoritarianism.
This is why I honestly cannot understand what DeSantis’ end goal is here. Add the right-leaning people who think he’s going too far by retaliating to the left-leaning people who already don’t like him and I don’t see how this behavior helps him win more elections (either at a state or national level). And if he’s half as smart as Tom says he is, he can’t actually think this is going to go well for him in court, especially given how forthright he’s been about his actions are exactly what Disney claims they are. So what’s the plan? Or is he really just a toddler throwing a tantrum because he didn’t get his way?
I don’t think it has anything to do with intelligence, I just honestly think he’s arrogant enough to actually believe that Disney wasn’t going to fight back. But you know what they say, there is no such thing as bad publicity.
Honestly, I think DeSantis did it on purpose. He knows there’s a high probability of losing in court but he can still say he ‘fought woke’ but the woke courts stopped him. It still works as a talking point for his campaign.
It’s either that or his meglomania overrode common sense and his mouth.
Good point
Maybe he intends to lose, so he can say “If you elect me as President, I’ll have the power to punish everyone who disagrees with us”.