Federal judge dismisses Disney's free speech lawsuit against DeSantis - Everyone getting BTFO lately

Article | Archive

ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — A federal judge on Wednesday dismissed Disney's free speech lawsuit against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, leaving the company's remaining hopes of regaining control of the district that governs Walt Disney World to a separate state court challenge.

U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor in Tallahassee said in his decision that Disney lacked standing in its First Amendment lawsuit against the Republican governor, the secretary of the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and DeSantis' appointees to the Disney World governing district. The separate lawsuit is still pending in state court in Orlando.


Disney had argued that legislation signed by DeSantis and passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature that transferred control of the Disney World governing district from Disney supporters to DeSantis appointees was in retaliation for the company publicly opposing the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law. The 2022 law banned classroom lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades and was championed by DeSantis, who recently suspended his campaign for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination.

Disney supporters had run the district, which provides municipal services such as firefighting, planning and mosquito control, for more than five decades after the Legislature created it in 1967.

Winsor, who was appointed to the bench by President Donald Trump in 2019, said in his decision that Disney didn't have standing to sue the governor because DeSantis already had picked the appointees to the board of the governing district.

“Because Disney seeks injunctive relief, it must allege an imminent future injury ... and it has not alleged facts showing that any imminent future appointments will contribute to its harm,” the judge wrote.

In dismissing the claim against the DeSantis appointees to the district's board, Winsor wrote that when a law on its face is constitutional, plaintiffs can’t make free-speech claims challenging it because they believe lawmakers acted with unconstitutional motives. The law that revamped Disney World's district didn't single out Disney by name but rather special districts created before the ratification of the Florida Constitution, a group that included the Disney district and a handful of other districts, he said.

“Here, similarly, no one reading the text of the challenged laws would suppose them directed against Disney,” the judge wrote. “The laws do not mention Disney.”


Disney plans to appeal the decision.

“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.”

The governor's press secretary, Jeremy Redfern, said the judge's decision supported DeSantis' belief that Disney doesn't have a right to its “own special government.”

“The days of Disney controlling its own government and being placed above the law are long gone,” Redfern said.

Before control of the district changed hands from Disney allies to DeSantis appointees early last year, the Disney supporters on its board signed agreements with Disney shifting control over design and construction at Disney World to the company. The new DeSantis appointees claimed the “eleventh-hour deals” neutered their powers, and the district sued the company in state court in Orlando to have the contracts voided.


Disney has filed counterclaims which include asking the state court to declare the agreements valid and enforceable.

Since the takeover of the district by the DeSantis appointees, around 50 of its 370 employees have departed, with many complaining that the district has become politicized and the backgrounds of the five DeSantis appointees have been distracting.
 
It's hilarious to see all "anti corporation" type leftists openly push back against DeSantis for trying to prevent a corporation from openly governing an entire district of Florida. And all because he has the "wrong political affiliation."
leftist are funny as I see a lot of anti-capitalist girls taking make up sponsor. Not to mention lefties like Vaush and the Roach living their lifestyles
 
“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.”
Like libtards do constantly, you groomer faggots? Get fucked.
 
It's hilarious to see all "anti corporation" type leftists openly push back against DeSantis for trying to prevent a corporation from openly governing an entire district of Florida. And all because he has the "wrong political affiliation."
I miss the days when the left refused to suck the corporate cock because corporations dressed to the right. Now that so much corposcum dresses to the left, leftists can't want to get on their knees and start gobbling.
 
"If left unchallenged" Nigger, this has been the law since 1968.

From the dismissal-
"But it is settled law that “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.” Hubbard, 803 F.3d
at 1312. The Eleventh Circuit has “held that many times.” Id. And this settled law
forecloses Disney’s claim.
In Hubbard, the Eleventh Circuit relied heavily on United States v. O’Brien,
a leading First Amendment precedent. 391 U.S. 367 (1968)."
The dismissal in full.
 
The decision is effectively:
"It doesn't matter if it was a reprisal, because it was a law passed by the state legislature."

So they shit on the government of florida while being in florida and are surprised florida then made them eat shit.

Disney is fucked because it's effectively bankrupt. It has one state that it could operate in while staying in the subtropics but be under Dems: Louisiana, which would basically be like moving to fucking Liberia.
 
The decision is effectively:
"It doesn't matter if it was a reprisal, because it was a law passed by the state legislature."
It could matter, if the law was directly targeted at one person/group.
From page 13:
"Disney also argues that even if the laws do not explicitly target it, they come close enough to warrant a Hubbard exception. But there is no “close enough” exception. A law either explicitly singles out a specific group or it does not, and the laws here do not."
 
Like libtards do constantly, you groomer faggots? Get fucked.
It doesn't even make sense either. How does Florida's internal politics affect the powers and authority of another state?
Just because Florida has legislation in place that allows them to take action, doesn't mean every state does.
And it's not like they can just pass laws without popular support. And if they do pass such laws WITH popular support, isn't that a good thing?

Even the situation in Texas only sets a precedent because it has to be done in defiance of the federal government.
 
I miss the days when the left refused to suck the corporate cock because corporations dressed to the right. Now that so much corposcum dresses to the left, leftists can't want to get on their knees and start gobbling.
That's another one on the laundry list of why I don't consider myself a hard core lefty anymore. It's astounding how lost the retards became under Obama and then especially post Trump.
 
And if they do pass such laws WITH popular support, isn't that a good thing?
You'd think they'd think so with how much they whine and moan about Our Democracy(tm), but of course that's just code for "whatever liberals want", they don't actually care about the will of the people.
 
Disney needs to stick with being an entertainment brand, not be a grandstanding, sublimal corporation for politics. Seriously, I've seen people cheer Disney on for their overreach in the state of Florida because of big, bad DeSantis. They'd rather give corporations power if it means they support their own politics.
 
The decision is effectively:
"It doesn't matter if it was a reprisal, because it was a law passed by the state legislature."
I've said from the start the whole Disney lawsuit rests on the idea that there is a "good faith" clause to legislating, that there must be a true and honest need for regulations before they are passed.

There isn't.

The government can retaliate as much as it likes against your business, as long as the regulations are introduced, passed and enforced in a fair and Constitutional matter.

There was nothing Unconstitutional about the State of Florida's decision to reconsider the several dozen special tax districts within it's own border and decide that they should be reformed, nor the particulars of that reform, nor the way it was brought up and voted on through the legislature.

The owners of those districts not wanting to change is irrelevant and became legally irrelevant once the bill passed into law.

The Constitution, after all, has a famous prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, not any punishment the punished objects to the need for.

That's not for them to decide, that's for their elected officials.
 
Last edited:
Back