News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[mikejs78]

Maybe I don't follow the Supreme Court close enough, but it seems odd, and even problematic actually, that they would be dropping hints about other potentially future cases.

It may be, but it's quite common that they telegraph around specific issues and what their thoughts are on those issues while not commenting on specific cases. But, comments in an opinion not related to a specific case are no guarantee.

 

[Surferboy567]

Are they going to grant Disney injunctive relief or does this need to last another 2 full years?

The board can pass many problematic changes that will affect Walt Disney World in that time.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Are they going to grant Disney injunctive relief or does this need to last another 2 full years?

The board can pass many problematic changes that will affect Walt Disney World in that time.

That the Board can do things does not meet the requirements for a court to issue a temporary injunction.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I wonder how the board feels about the state throwing them in limbo for two years.

 

[Surferboy567]

That the Board can do things does not meet the requirements for a court to issue a temporary injunction.

How about the board does things to punish Disney and their customers?

 

[lazyboy97o]

How about the board does things to punish Disney and their customers?

They still have to do something first. They’ve talked a lot but still haven’t done much of anything.

 

[castlecake2.0]

They still have to do something first. They’ve talked a lot but still haven’t done much of anything.

Bets on them just sticking to minding their own business for the next two years and focusing on actual district needs until all this mess is undone

 

[lazyboy97o]

Bets on them just sticking to minding their own business for the next two years and focusing on actual district needs until all this mess is undone

I imagine they’ll continue to move forward with changing the comprehensive plan so they can do what they say. They’ve made such a big deal about cleaning up a mess that they can’t just do as they desire and so they’re now committed to a process that is going to take time. I don’t believe they have as of yet even found an urban design firm to start doing the work of saying that Walt Disney World is an inappropriate use of Walt Disney World.

I also imagine they were planning to ride ascendant coattails in being aggressive against a more pliant Disney.

 

[GoofGoof]

Apparently the “shareholder“ lawsuit against Disney for their original response to the bill has fallen flat.

https://www.thestreet.com/travel/disneys-dont-say-gay-bill-lawsuit-win-puts-desantis-on-notice?puc=yahoo&cm_ven=YAHOO

 

[MisterPenguin]

Also, by waiting two years, FL will have a new governor and changed legislature which could 'fix' the issue by repealing the previous legislation making any court battle moot.

EDIT: Oops. Timing's off.

 

[mkt]

Also, by waiting two years, FL will have a new governor

Yes

and changed legislature

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. I don't trust that this could happen.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. I don't trust that this could happen.

DeSantis has to go all in, no matter what now, because any change of course would be seen as weakness. To him and his core supporters at least.

The next person isn't handcuffed to this idiotic battle like he is. Given the damage it has done to the reputation of both Florida and DeSantis, it will be very easy for the next person to end it and be seen as more reasonable by comparison.

I don't necessarily trust the next person will be reasonable either, but they have the cover to be so.

Politicians pander to people they don't fully agree with all the time. DeSantis probably knows the importance of WDW to Florida but did what he did because he thought it was a win for him politically. The next person will likely have that same knowledge, but also plenty of reason to reverse course without blowback.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Also, by waiting two years, FL will have a new governor and changed legislature which could 'fix' the issue by repealing the previous legislation making any court battle moot.

The next gubernatorial election is not until 2026.

 

[mkt]

The next gubernatorial election is not until 2026.

His end goal is POTUS. If he doesn't make it, does he finish his term as governor? Or does he pull a Sarah Palin?

 

[Lilofan]

DeSantis has to go all in, no matter what now, because any change of course would be seen as weakness. To him and his core supporters at least.

The next person isn't handcuffed to this idiotic battle like he is. Given the damage it has done to the reputation of both Florida and DeSantis, it will be very easy for the next person to end it and be seen as more reasonable by comparison.

I don't necessarily trust the next person will be reasonable either, but they have the cover to be so.

Politicians pander to people they don't fully agree with all the time. DeSantis probably knows the importance of WDW to Florida but did what he did because he thought it was a win for him politically. The next person will likely have that same knowledge, but also plenty of reason to reverse course without blowback.

"When there is no way out, you go deeper in", - quote from the movie The International

 

[note2001]

I think I missed a few episodes in this comedic series. Good to know it's still going strong. No writer's strike here, huh?

 

[Chi84]

The Above the Law blog has a new entry from Joe Patrice about something he noticed in the Moore v Harper Supreme Court decision. The decision includes mention of the Contracts Clause, as an example of how state legislatures are constrained. Something the court has not invoked in awhile. The speculation, is that the Contracts Clause was not randomly included, but a signal from the high court that they are watching the Disney situation in Florida.

Supreme Court Subtweets Ron DeSantis That He's Totally Losing To Disney - Above the Law

Supreme Court reminds federal judges that Disney's right about the Contracts Clause.

abovethelaw.com

It's not only the Contracts Clause. I just read Moore and Justice Roberts gave two interesting examples to support his reasoning. On p. 27 of the slip opinion, he says: "As in other areas where the exercise of federal authority or the vindication of federal rights implicates questions of state law, we have an obligation to ensure that state court interpretations of that law do not evade federal law."

The two examples involve the Takings Clause and the Contracts Clause of the Federal Constitution - these are both theories of recovery advanced by Disney in its federal lawsuit. Moore held that while state law is an important source for defining property rights, "States 'may not sidestep the Takings Clause by disavowing traditional property interests.'" Also, although federal court accord respectful consideration to the views of the State courts, "Still, 'in order that the constitutional mandate may not become a dead letter, we are bound to decide for ourselves whether a contract was made.'"

The court also said something particularly interesting about determining whether a state had an adequate and independent ground sufficient to support its judgment. "We have in those cases considered whether a state court opinion below adopted novel reasoning to stifle the 'vindication in state courts of ... federal constitutional rights.'"

Probably just all a coincidence.

 

[Lilofan]

Leaving politics is great. We should clap for that.

Very rare these days. Some keep getting reelected some in their 70s and 80s still chugging along in DC. One even worked until age 100.

 

[mikejs78]

I’m actually worried he’ll get even more extreme running Florida for a 2028 run.

I don’t think he expects to win the 2024 nomination, this is just setting the foundation for 2028.

He will be out of office in 2028. It's extremely hard (but not impossible) for a candidate without an office, unless they were a former VP.

Also depends how he does. If he finishes 2nd, maybe. But I wouldn't discount a complete flame-out.

Name the also rans from 2016.
This is a one shot deal but maybe he has enough base to take Scott's seat when he drops out

Scott is up for election in 2024. If he wins reelection he won't be up again until 2030.

 

[pdude81]

He will be out of office in 2028. It's extremely hard (but not impossible) for a candidate without an office, unless they were a former VP.

Also depends how he does. If he finishes 2nd, maybe. But I wouldn't discount a complete flame-out.



Scott is up for election in 2024. If he wins reelection he won't be up again until 2030.

If DeSantis was a long-term thinker, he'd be running for that job instead of POTUS.