Chi84
Premium Member
That part of the decision was a particularly strained interpretation of the law.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District
- Thread starter castlecake2.0
- Start date
Good thing I purchased my figment popcorn bucket!It is far from over. Disney is not going to just let it go.
Disney issues statement in response to court case dismissal against Ron DeSantis and CFTOD and vows to 'press forward'
Disney issues statement in response to court case dismissal against Ron DeSantis and CFTOD and vows to 'press forward'www.wdwmagic.com
Serpico Jones
Well-Known Member
WDW is the lifeblood of the company. Iger needs to swallow his pride and contact the governor and strike some type of deal.
Refile when actual monetary damages occur, or get additional landowners within a district to join in and go class action. It’s not easy, but it’s not impossible.
The reasoning was that Disney didn’t suffer damages, and that the law was not written specifically to target them. Get more landowners and prove damages, and you have defeated the reasoning.
Additionally, there is still the case in state court, which is a contract dispute. If ironically, the state court finds in favor of Disney, they still win, because the powers of the district are then severely limited.
"El Gran Magnifico"
Mr Flibble is Very Cross.
Just a hunch, but I think the cost of the refill just went up considerably.
Chi84
Premium Member
Keep in mind that this was all happening at the same time that I had a screaming two-year-old next to me when I read it.
From what I understand, the biggest issue is that Disney had no standing because the law - although clearly meant to target them - was not written as such.
So so my logic is that a new suit would be filed with similar but additional plaintiffs, and with additional time for Disney and the other plaintiffs to tabulate actual financial damages stemming from the law.
By then, outside of the law, DeSantis would be out of office, and the state of Florida would likely be more inclined to settle quickly and make it go away.
Samesies!
WaltsCryoChamber
New Member
I’ll keep my politics hidden just to not cause any undue discourse in here, but if i understand the process right, this is going to be a pretty tough process for Disney to win this case. Disney has to successfully appeal, successfully win in a republican majority circuit court, and assuming under this situation that Desantis would most likely successfully appeal to supreme court(Clarence Thomas in charge of appeals from this circuit), they would have to win in a 6-3 majority SCOTUS. Desantis and FL just have advantages in each process over them.
MagicHappens1971
Well-Known Member
While I don't think Disney will find a win in state (FL) court for several reasons, mostly partisan ones.... I don't think the Supreme Court (if they choose to hear this) CAN rule against Disney. That will set a very dangerous precedent for retaliation against first amendment freedoms.
Tom P.
Well-Known Member
If there is anything we've learned over the past couple of years, it's that this Supreme Court "can" do just about anything, and that predictions to the contrary from either side are often wrong.
mikejs78
Premium Member
- The 11th circuit has been deciding against DeSantis in a lot of cases recently. Just because it's a majority of Republicans, it doesn't mean they are all for DeSantis' activist tendencies. Just recently, the 11th circuit remanded a case back regarding the DeSantis firing of a state prosecutor for his speech. Judge Kevin Newsom, a Trump appointee, said in his opinion "The First Amendment is an inconvenient thing. It protects expression that some find wrongheaded, or offensive, or even ridiculous.". So party affiliation is not a foregone conclusion.
- In the Disney case, this particular judge worked for the FL legislature before becoming a judge. There is no way to say if other judges would rule similarly to him.
- The Supreme Court doesn't vote in a bloc. Just recently The Court ruled 5-4 in the Texas immigration case, with two Republican appointef judges joining with the three Democratic appointed judges. Happens all the time.
- It takes 4 judges to decide to hear a case. So assuming the Democratic appointed judges agree to hear it, only one more vote is needed to hear the case if it gets that far.
Prince-1
Well-Known Member
JohnD
Well-Known Member
Well, she said if she had her way... But the tread is still here.
JohnD
Well-Known Member
I think I'm on firm ground that any Florida law specific to Disney since 1967 has never explicitly mentioned them. See the monorail inspection law from last year alone.
Last edited:
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
The people acting like Disney can just leave Florida are hilarious. Some of these comments in YouTube for major news breaking this story can provide a good laugh.
