Yes this should be happening. As pointed out on various other threads, Mr Igor has his hands full of problems. This is something that has really gone too far. Make a settlement and move on. And anyone who believes that one side will definitely win has not paid attention how no sure thing happens when the courts get involved.
This is my opinion as well…but that probably just makes us “idiots”
This was in the context of a settlement instead of a court verdict. The state cannot really settle the case with Disney though. The legislature could pass a new law making the current court case irrelevant. That's not really the two parties agreeing to a settlement though. It's certainly not the two opposing legal teams agreeing to a compromise. If we include Disney (maybe with help from the state lawyers) lobbying the state legislature to pass that new law and what it looks like, maybe that's a settlement path. But, it's nothing like any other settlement negations in any normal court case. The state lawyers don't really have any negotiating leverage to bring about a settlement instead of complete the outcome in court.
If Disney wins in federal court, the board will change back to what it was. Any other change to the composition of the board that is not "revert back because the law that changed it wasn't legal" and "keep the current" would require a new law being passed to change it. Everyone will know what is in the new law, even if they don't know how that content was lobbied for.
They'll all have to "move on", meaning completely reverse their prior positions. Not the "move on" that means Disney just gives up and accepts the new situation.
I agree…
So no settlement then? I guess we’ll have to wait to find out.
The way he settles is by calling a special session of the legislature for the specific purpose of making changes. That’s just brings the issue back into the spotlight which is the exact opposite of what he wants. “Moving on” seems to me to be more “I’m no longer bringing this up and stop asking about it because it’s not playing well”.
Which isn't going to work when Disney are blasting their filed motions out to every single media outlet (under embargo too, so they have their articles ready to go the moment it drops in PACER).
The lawyers for the two cases at least have the ability to do this.
This one feels like wishful thinking. The governor could agree to appoint new board members with Disney input, but even that is still sketchy on value.
The lawyers for Disney at least have the ability to do this.
This one feels even more wishful than the first. None of the legal teams involved have any leverage at all to convince the legislature to pass a new law.
Most settlement compromises result in both sides getting something and giving up something. Since it's never been clear what the State's goal is here beyond punishing Disney. It's also unclear what the compromise would be? Punish Disney less isn't really a compromise.
I assume not.
The laws were changed…hammered through with predictable little thought
The court should not be adjudicating based on public image.
It’s already at the federal level.
Why is this worrying? This scenario would still return the situation to the status quo ante.
That's nice of you to post, but I could use a "Reader's Digest" version.
