A federal court has dismissed Disney’s lawsuit against Republican Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. The lawsuit alleges that the administration revoked Disney World’s special district status and enacted an amendment to the U.S. Constitution in retaliation for the company’s attacks on state laws that prohibit teachers from discussing sexual relationships with pre-teens. It alleges that it violated Article 1 rights. Minor.
In Wednesday’s court argument, I started saying Disney doesn’t have standing to sue the governor or his administration, arguing that “if a law is facially constitutional, plaintiffs can’t make speeches by claiming that the legislators who passed it acted for a constitutionally impermissible purpose.” “The freedom of the person cannot be challenged.”
“Because Disney is seeking injunctive relief, it must allege imminent future damages, but it does not allege facts showing that any imminent future appointments will contribute to those damages.” . “Disney struggled to clearly articulate the injuries caused by the Commissioner and the Governor.”
The court further held that Disney has standing to sue district members of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District (CTFOD), but still loses on the merits.the court explained In that opinion Disney had standing to sue the governor and his administration because “if a law is constitutional on its face, plaintiffs can claim that the legislators who passed it acted for a constitutionally impermissible purpose” “No one can object to it,” he argued.
“Because Disney is seeking injunctive relief, it must allege imminent future damages, but it does not allege facts showing that any imminent future appointments will contribute to those damages.” . “Disney struggled to clearly articulate the injuries caused by the Commissioner and the Governor.”
The case is Walt Disney Parks & Resorts v. DeSantis, No. 4:23-cv-163, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.
