Disney Can't Prove DeSantis Retaliated Against It, Federal Judge Rules
Disney has vowed to appeal the ruling.

A federal judge dismissed Disney's lawsuit against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on the grounds that the entertainment giant did not have sufficient standing to bring the First Amendment challenge.
In the lawsuit, Disney argued that DeSantis had unconstitutionally retaliated against the company by organizing a state takeover of the special taxing district that had been created in 1967 and covered the 25,000-plus acres now occupied by the Walt Disney World resort's theme parks, hotels, and various other facilities. Disney claimed that DeSantis had engaged in a "relentless campaign to weaponize government power against Disney" in response to Disney's then-CEO Bob Chapek publicly criticizing DeSantis' approval of a law that restricted discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in schools.
In Wednesday's ruling, federal Judge Allen Winsor wrote that Disney fell short of proving the retaliation claim. Disney, he wrote, "has not alleged any specific actions the new board took (or will take) because of the governor's alleged control."
In a statement, DeSantis' spokesman Jeff Redfern said Wednesday's ruling vindicated the governor's view that "Disney is still just one of many corporations in the state, and they do not have a right to their own special government."
Meanwhile, Disney has vowed to appeal the ruling. "This is an important case with serious implications for the rule of law, and it will not end here," the company said in a statement. "If left unchallenged, this would set a dangerous precedent and give license to states to weaponize their official powers to punish the expression of political viewpoints they disagree with."
Indeed, DeSantis may have prevailed within the letter of the law, but there is little doubt that his actions toward Disney were a direct response to Chapek's criticism. We know this because DeSantis has said and written as much.
"When Disney first came out against the bill…people in the legislature started floating this idea of going after Reedy Creek," DeSantis told The American Conservative in an interview published in May. Meanwhile, DeSantis wrote extensively about his fight with Disney in his recent book, The Courage To Be Free, and leaves little doubt about how he approached the issue. In one passage, DeSantis writes that "things got worse for Disney" after the company criticized his policies. Finally, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed last February, DeSantis explained that his administration's actions toward Disney were an attempt to "fight back" against the corporation's so-called "woke ideology" as expressed in Disney's criticism.
Winsor says those actions don't meet the legal standard for being unconstitutional. Fine. It's still deeply distasteful for a governor to target a private company because its leaders dared to criticize his policy choices—and DeSantis' handling of this situation should not become a model for other chief executives, no matter what the courts have to say about it.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"DeSantis' approval of a law that restricted discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in schools" TO AGE APPROPIATE SUBJECTS.
(emphasis added)
Plus the damn mouse has to convince the courts that the bill that addressed ALL special districts in the state that were not in compliance with the law somehow singled out the groomers.
Chemjeff hardest hit
People should talk dirty to kids only with the approval of their parents with advice from child care professionals. /Jeffy
I am making a real GOOD MONEY ($550 to $750 / hr) online from my laptop. Last month I GOT chek Qd of nearly 85000$, this online work is simple and straightforward, don't have to go OFFICE, Its home online job. You become independent after joining this JOB. I really thanks to my FRIEND who refer me...
This SITE————>>> http://Www.Bizwork1.com
[ Work At Home For USA ]My buddy’s aunt makes $64/hr. on the computer. She has been unemployed for eight kaz months but last month her paycheck was $12716 just working on the computer for a few hours.
Check The Details HERE……….. http://Www.Worktoday7.co
“DeSantis’ approval of a law that restricted discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in schools” TO AGE APPROPIATE SUBJECTS... AS PART OF INSTRUCTION... WITH PARENTS' PERMISSION.
The even entirely absent sex, abject insanity of the counterargument from every market and founding liberal principle is mind-boggling.
Advanced Christianity, Mormonism, Scientology, Christian Science, Flat Eartherism, Phrenology, Miasma Theory... to third graders, in art or reading class, without parents' permission and/or against their wishes? GTFO and don't come back!
None of those subjects are a problem when put in history class and when put in historical contexts. This is what the progressive educators won’t do with their ideological subjects.
" the bill that addressed ALL special districts in the state that were not in compliance with the law somehow singled out the groomers."
What?
"The bill dissolves all special districts established before 1968 in the state that haven’t been re-ratified, which applies to Reedy Creek and five others."
The bill wasn't targeted at "groomers." Like every other modern bill of attainder, it's written in a way to target a specific group or individual without directly naming that target.
Hey, Disney, you lived by corrupt favors from the state, now the corrupt state is taking them back. Pray they don't further alter the deal.
Sniff, sniff....sorry Bob.
Alright! Florida story!
Lol. Eric straight up rage lying about what the judge said.
“At the end of the day, under the law of this Circuit, ‘courts shouldn’t look to a law’s legislative history to find an illegitimate motivation for an otherwise constitutional statute.’… Because that is what Disney seeks here, its claim fails as a matter of law,” Winsor wrote.
“In short, Disney lacks standing to sue the Governor or the Secretary, and its claims against the CFTOD Defendants fail on the merits because ‘when a statute is facially constitutional, a plaintiff cannot bring a free-speech challenge by claiming that the lawmakers who passed it acted with a constitutionally impermissible purpose,'” Winsor said in the order granting the motions to dismiss.
I should add the judge is correct. Left leaning judges used the theory of animus to remove regulations legally pushed under Trump, laws legally passed by the legislature, rules to reduce voter fraud, etc.
It is used as a means to undo work of elected officials. But apparently Eric likes this behavior.
"In short, Disney lacks standing..."
Lacks standing, now where have I heard that before?
Viagra ads?
Eric, like all Democrats only likes it when it goes their way. When it doesn't they scream that the Courts are broken or that the fix was in. Does New York come to mind?
In one passage, DeSantis writes that "things got worse for Disney" after the company criticized his policies.
I haven't read DeSantis' book, but... you're saying that in his book he wrote the five words "things got worse for Disney"?
Well, that's the slammiest dunkiest thing I've ever heard.
It's not like there is other evidence of customers turning on Disney or the jaw dropping performance of their movies, nope must hold to the worst interpretation possible
"Disney is still just one of many corporations in the state, and they do not have a right to their own special government."
“Your honor, how many other special district corporations are there in Florida? How many of them criticized the Governor? And how many of them did DeSantis ‘go after’ besides Disney? What?! Only us?! Your honor, I rest my case!”
Difficulty. It wasn't just Disney. Pesky facts.
Over 1,900 special districts.
None criticized the governor. (Disney employees criticized legislation for doing things it did not, in fact, do.)
DeSantis went after none. (The legislation covered a few districts that were still not incompliance with current state laws, and gave them time to come into compliance. Only then were they dissolved.)
The legislation covered a few districts that were still not incompliance with current state laws, and gave them time to come into compliance. Only then were they dissolved..
The initial bill dissolved 6 special districts. I can find no reference that they were not in compliance with the law, merely that they were formed before the current constitution of FL was ratified. There was no time to come in to compliance. The bill is remarkably simple:
“(2) Notwithstanding s. 189.072(2), any independent special district established by a special act prior to the date of ratification of the Florida Constitution on November 5, 1968, and which was not reestablished, re-ratified, or otherwise reconstituted by a special act or general law after November 5, 1968, is dissolved effective June 1, 2023. An independent special district affected by this subsection may be reestablished on or after June 1, 2023, pursuant to the requirements and limitations of this chapter. Section 2. This act shall take effect July 1, 2022.”
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022C/4C/BillText/er/PDF
This was followed up by a bill specifically targeting Reedy Creek. CS/HB 9-B: Reedy Creek Improvement District, Orange and Osceola Counties… Renaming Reedy Creek and giving control to the FL governor. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023B/9B/?Tab=BillText
LOL at "The legislation covered a few districts that were still not incompliance with current state laws, and gave them time to come into compliance. "
That's 100% false.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2022/04/19/florida-lawmakers-will-try-to-punish-disney-for-dont-say-gay-opposition-as-part-of-special-session/?sh=2a6dde905208
Sorry your buddies at Igerland have been taking L after L here, Bubba. No matter what handwringing bullshit from the MSM you're posting.
I refer you to the text posted by Quicktown Brix above.
Guys, I'm trying to help you out here, this is for your own good. No one fucking cares about the Florida-Disney legal spat. No one.
Groomer advocates do.
Jeff and BP2 hardest hit.
Don't forget sarc running behind them screaming "wait for me guys."
He doesn't know why, but damned if he'll stay with the mean girls and he wants a friend.
Sadly, not true and not hard enough or often enough to do any good.
[flips open Reason-style guide]
Yup, right here, you misspelled "pouncing Republicans".
You know who else didn't care about a Florida-Disney spat?
I am so sorry this is happening to you Reason.
Wow, losing their preferential government status then completely failing to get another extension on Steamboat Willie's copyright - it's a tough year for Disney. Might be time to sell my stock.
Might be time? You held onto it through the 60% drop in value over the last year and a half or so?
What could this mean for taxpayers?
It could mean big tax increases for residents of Orange and Osceola counties, as taxpayers would suddenly have to pick up the costs of everything from fire protection to road maintenance within Disney property.
Orange County Tax Collector Scott Randolph tweeted that if Reedy Creek is gone, so is the $105 million Disney collects from itself annually to operate those services.
https://news.yahoo.com/desantis-dissolves-disney-reedy-creek-100040635.html
Why are you citing speculative reporting from 2 years ago, Bubba? Your stock portfolio take a hit or something?
Tell the Rat to stop making wokey shit and using their corporate power to try and strongarm a state, and maybe they won’t have these issues.
Everyone knows it was retaliation - probably even the judge. But proof is hard to come by in the absence of explicit comments, and regardless, people who like DeSantis will approve even if it were in retaliation, and people who like Disney and loathe DeSantis would not approve even if it hadn't been.
Just about every law passes as some form of retaliation against some criminal doing something dastardly.
He rEtaLiateD against child castration fetishists.
Not usually against a specific person, though.
It's not usual for only a single person to have a legal right.
This is stated retaliation for opposing a law.
The evidence we have is that Disney was violating the agreement that set up Reedy Creek and essentially bribing the “officials” in charge of it to basically form a defacto corporate government.
I’m not shocked you support this type of corporate government setup.
I’m not shocked you support this type of corporate government setup.
Except that I didn't. You will note from what I said that I expressed no preference one way or the other. But of course you're engaged in your usual practice of misreading what someone else has said.
FWIW I think that Ron DeSantis is an authoritarian clown, that corporations like Disney shouldn't have literal - in the etymological sense - privileges, and that DeSantis clearly retaliated but Disney have no right to whine about it because they shouldn't have been privileged in the first place.
It is possible that the term "privilege" won't trigger you.
Nobody buys your shir shrike.
Even here your concern is attacking a perceived political enemy. Not the state corporate relationship that lasted for decades. And the fact your a soros acolyte who thrives off those relationships, nobody believes you.
Still not shrike, you lying POS.
Why the fuck are you so unable to read what someone else has wirtten? Smoke got in your eyes from your last cross-burning?
I made it absolutely clear that while I do not like DeSantis, I don't approve of these corporate arrangements. And you're either too stupid or dishonest to grasp this.
What part of "corporations like Disney shouldn’t have literal – in the etymological sense – privileges, ..Disney have no right to whine about it because they shouldn’t have been privileged in the first place" do you refuse to understand?
You have to understand. In Jesse's mind, any criticism of him or his team *necessarily* means support for the other team. He is mentally unable to conceive of a position that is critical of both teams. He is a simple-minded binary thinker whose mind is partially melted from years and years of right-wing media intake.
Yes,
DeSantis: "2 + 2 = 5"
Disney: "2 + 2 = 3"
SRG: "No. 2 + 2 = 4"
JesseAz: "you must be pro-Disney or you would have come up with a number much closer to 5"
Of course it was retaliation. Played *EXACTLY* the same way the left used Government to mandate LGBT indoctrination onto everyone of which Disney was a key player.
In the big picture this is just leftard self-projection. Blaming others through the court system for exactly what they themselves have done/are.
But I'd take note to the bigger symptom. None of this political battle would be happening if it wasn't for Commie-Education in the first place. All of this political destabilization is but the effects of trying to communize and socialize the US.
...the monopoly of gun-forces (governments) in the nation is being asked to pick a side on a morality/religious subject which it should've never become a part of.
And the very reason it has become a part of that subject was due to all the leftard *special (sick) people* privilege the left has continued to ask for it's involvement in.
Disney should stop doing business with local companies for a while, encouraging them to take up any opinions about this with Gov. DeSantis. Buy the ice cream, napkins, hamburgers, batteries, turkey legs, soda syrup, soap, etc. from vendors not located in Florida. You can't buy beer from an out-of-state wholesaler, so just stop selling any beer brewed in Florida. Putting a few thousand Floridians out of work would express Disney's displeasure just as DeSantis has expressed his.
Let's see who can swing the biggest . . . Mickey.
Surely demanding *special* public privileged-statuses for poking men in their poop-holes is worth it! /s Your kind will end up eating it's own soon enough and I just hope you don't take everyone else with you on your crusade to planned destruction.
Why am I not surprised that you like the idea of corporatism and company towns.
Uh, most of these places already bring in supplies from out of state, you slack-jawed hicklib. They set up contracts with bidders and get the cheapest price, wherever it comes from.
But I can't expect a small-town hicklib ex-journoscum to know such things.
Also, fuckin' LOL at you saying Disney needs to fuck up operations at Disneyworld even further just to own Orangesman. After losing $800 million in net income from FY22, they need all the help they can get.
Carry on, hicklib.
Disaffected, woke entertainment company CEOs are my favorite type of culture war casualty.
Lol
Suddenly the faux libertarians at Reason like corporate welfare.
How is this welfare?
It was a special improvement district that gave Disney control over the building of infrastructure that Disney paid for.
Now the county will be responsible for the infrastructure, including the funding of it.
...because Disney won't be charged taxes?
Disney violated its agreement on creating housing and it ran the Reedy Creek committee as a political arm of Disney and not the actually independent body it was supposed to be.
Disney did to themselves.
So Disney should spend a lot more money on things to teach Florida a lesson? And what would those things be?
There is no such thing as a free market airport.
You gave me the image of real-time bidding for gate slots 🙂
The Daily Wire needs to produce a satire piece, maybe in the style of Kevin Smith's Clerks, where a surreptitious sanctuary city rounds up all of the Chik-Fil-A employees and ships them to Tallahassee, whereupon they get a warm personal greeting from the Governor and their choice of location from one of the half-dozen new locations in the state that the franchise was going to open up anyway.
Take control of your medical records today! Contact us now for comprehensive Medical Chronology Services tailored to your needs. Unlock clarity, save time, and empower your case with accurate, organized documentation. Don't wait, reclaim control of your healthcare journey now!
Medical Chronology Services in USA
Eric:
What part of "Bill of Attainder" don't you understand?
When immortal Corporations, Disney included, demand and get perpetual paper exemptions from state and local laws, they may expect to eventually run afoul of what amounts to a Constitutional Statute of Exemption
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
What a shit take from Boehm.
Didn't actually read the ruling did you?
Here is the Cliff Notes summary:
If it ain't unconstitutional legislative acts are plenary and cannot be challenged based upon any impugned 'motives.'
Tried to tell you, but you weren't interested in hearing about reality.
If it ain’t unconstitutional legislative acts are plenary and cannot be challenged based upon any impugned ‘motives.’
Broadly true, though, most notably in evolution cases, the evidence of motive can go to discerning the intent of the act and thence its constitutionality. (That's why Scalia, in his dissent in Edwards v Aguillard, laid out a roadmap for legislatures to pass creationist legislation without falling foul of the Establishment clause.)
Multiple choice quiz!
Criminalizing free speech is:
A. Okay if Team Red does it, bad if Team Blue does it
B. Okay if Team Blue does it, bad if Team Red does it
C. Bad no matter which team does it
If you spent all day yesterday criticizing Biden’s DOJ for prosecuting protesters for “singing and praying” outside of an abortion clinic, then to be consistent you have to criticize DeSantis’ efforts to punish Disney for their speech.
Surely you have a cite showing DeSantis criminalizing Disney's free speech.
Forcing special government entities to either reorganize according to modern regulations or be dissolved is not criminalizing free speech, and the fact that in this case it ended up removing a corrupt company town committing a billion dollars in municipal bond fraud is just icing on the cake.
Who at Disney was "prosecuted"?
Where's that dipshit Nelson? He sure was confident that Disney would wipe the floor with DeSantis after discovery took place.
Disney will probably get its special privileges back once DeSantis is gone.
DeSantis will never again, for so much as a microsecond, be considered a serious candidate for POTUS.
So a partial loss for Disney, but a complete win for America.
Disney will probably get its special privileges back once DeSantis is gone.
Florida is effectively a red state now. And Disney's special privileges were based on the premise that Disney wasn’t actually running Reedy Creek, which it legally cannot do. That was why they tried the “retaliation” angle and lost.
But please, do try to keep pulling some kind of win out of here for your side. Disney certainly needs the cheerleaders right now.
Pure wishcasting
Medical Chronology Report is a crucial source for an attorney which makes the medico-legal case to be presented every bit of inputs with the arrangements of events or dates in order of the occurrence.
Medical Chronology Services in USA