Disney on Thursday appealed a judge’s dismissal of a free speech lawsuit alleging Gov. Ron DeSantis’ retaliatory takeover of the Walt Disney World management area, but the Florida governor separately called any appeal a “mistake.” He said that.
“They should move on,” DeSantis said at a news conference in Jacksonville the day after the verdict.
Disney has filed a notice of appeal against Wednesday’s ruling by a federal judge in Tallahassee, saying the ruling, if left unchallenged, could pose a danger by giving states permission to weaponize the power to punish dissent. He said it would set a precedent. A separate lawsuit over who will control the district is also pending in state court in Orlando.
Disney said the bill signed by DeSantis and passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature that would transfer control of the Disney World management area from Disney supporters to DeSantis appointees is part of the state’s “Don’t Tell Me I’m Gay” law. They claimed that the move was in retaliation against the company, which had openly opposed the move. A 2022 law would ban classroom lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades, and Disney, in a campaign speech, recently suspended his campaign for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. Supported by DeSantis, who used it as a punching bag.
Disney supporters have operated the district, which provides municipal services such as fire protection, planning and mosquito control, for more than 50 years since Congress created the district in 1967.
In dismissing the free speech lawsuit, U.S. District Judge Allen Windsor ruled that Disney’s claims against DeSantis and the Florida agency chief lacked merit, and that the company’s claims against the DeSantis-appointed Disney World Management District Board of Directors lacked merit. He said there was no reason.
Windsor wrote that if a law is constitutional on its face, plaintiffs cannot claim free speech to challenge it because they believe lawmakers acted with unconstitutional motives. He said the law renewing Disney World’s districts did not single out Disney by name, but rather special districts, a group that included the Disney District and a handful of other districts, created before the ratification of the Florida Constitution. Stated.
Experts disagree on how successful Disney’s appeal will be, with some saying the important issues raised by the ruling should be addressed in the appellate court and others saying the dispute should not be resolved in court. Some argue that the issue should have been resolved politically instead.
“Maybe Disney should go back to lobbying and writing checks,” says Rollins College, who wrote the definitive account of Disney World governance in his book Marriage of a Mouse: Walt Disney World and Orlando. Professor Emeritus Richard Foglesong said.
“As the judge’s decision shows, the judge made the mistake of using the court to settle political issues,” Foglesong said Thursday. “Everyone knows that the act of Congress was retaliation against Disney. It just couldn’t be proven by legal standards.”
Asked via email to comment on the judge’s decision, Orlando attorney Jacob Schumer, who has been following the case, pointed to a social media post he made on Wednesday after the verdict. In his post, he said an appellate court would need to consider whether the law specifically identifies an entity, even if it is not directly named and fits the criteria for a covered entity. Ta.
“I still think it would be unpleasant for them to remain in a fundamental loophole that allows them to freely retaliate against speech by identifying parties by objective criteria rather than by name,” Schumer said of the appeals court. said.
Before control of the district shifted from Disney allies to DeSantis appointees early last year, Disney allies on the board struck a deal with Disney that transferred control of Disney World design and construction to the company. . DeSantis’ new hires claimed the “11th-hour contract” invalidated their authority, and the district sued the company in state court in Orlando to invalidate the contract.
Disney filed a counterclaim, including asking a state court to declare the contract valid and enforceable.
Disney on Wednesday suspended the six-month period of its lawsuit in state court, accusing it of failing to conduct depositions of new district administrators allied with DeSantis and failing to obtain documents from districts overseen by DeSantis. I requested it to stop again.
