The Rule Against Perpetuities still exists in Florida and specifically states that a way to avoid it is by providing that an interest in land vests or terminates “no later than 21 years after the death of an individual then alive.”Exactly. It is an antiquated provision that hasn't been in wide use in new agreements for the better part of a century, and updating it with Charles in 2023 is just absurd, unnecessary, and frankly disgusting. If it were not for people playing politics and liking the supposed "gotchya!" nature of it, this would be widely condemned. This isn't 1930 any more.
I can't think of any reason besides political affiliation that wouldn't make someone think including a provision that is based upon the death of a 21 month old baby who has less than nothing to do with the situation is appropriate or in any way near good taste. The flurry of responses here just shows how terribly far down the rabbit hole of "as long as I agree politically with the entity doing it, morality is irrelevant," we are.
If the other party had done this, people would be calling for riots in the street.
In any case...back to the dumpster fire this thread goes, LOL.
If you have a problem with the morality of this current legal provision you should address it to the Florida legislature.