It’s absolutely fair when it’s self inflicted.That’s absolutely unfair..
….To Director Krennic
It’s absolutely fair when it’s self inflicted.That’s absolutely unfair..
….To Director Krennic
I don’t see how it’s “unrelated” at all…I believe the date was pushed back since the building they’ll be moving to won’t be built until then. Unrelated to this nonsense
I wondering about this too.If Disney wins this, and all their demands are met what happens exactly?
“Declare that House Bill 4C and House Bill 9C are unlawful and unenforceable because they were enacted in retaliation for Disney’s political speech in violation of the First Amendment”
This is suggesting a full roll back of the initial Reedy Creek dissolution bill. What does that look like in practice the state just picks up and leaves? Old board members are reinstated new politics rolled back?
Or are we only talking about the developer agreement as it is also listed in the lawsuit?
What stops the state from trying to do this again? If Disney wins the suit can they stop that from happening?
I believe it would effectively reinstate RCID as it was.If Disney wins this, and all their demands are met what happens exactly?
“Declare that House Bill 4C and House Bill 9C are unlawful and unenforceable because they were enacted in retaliation for Disney’s political speech in violation of the First Amendment”
All hypotheticals, but it’s been theorized that a judge could issue a “cooling down” period where the legislature would be unable to do anything regarding RCID for X amount of time. The legislature also would not be able to do the exact same thing they just did (to my understanding) if Disney wins. The suit is also trying to have the legislatures void of the developers agreement overturned as well. It could be said they don’t really care about the development agreement because if they win they don’t need it. Just doesn’t make sense to sue multiple times, so they put everything in there.This is suggesting a full roll back of the initial Reedy Creek dissolution bill. What does that look like in practice the state just picks up and leaves? Old board members are reinstated new politics rolled back?
Or are we only talking about the developer agreement as it is also listed in the lawsuit?
What stops the state from trying to do this again? If Disney wins the suit can they stop that from happening?
I think Disney can see the day Ron is the former and they still want to cut wages so they proceed as planned repeating all the while " this too shall pass "I don’t see how it’s “unrelated” at all…
You want to talk about avoiding wages and taxes…lake nona is the poster child for it.
They should cancel it immediately…should have already, actually.
I think that’s the obvious hedge.I think Disney can see the day Ron is the former and they still want to cut wages so they proceed as planned repeating all the while " this too shall pass "
From State Rep Anna Eskamani:
With Judge Mark Walker assigned to the case, trust me, Disney has already won.
Disney could show up with a junior attorney and still win this. DeSantis doesn't have a prayer.
This is suggesting a full roll back of the initial Reedy Creek dissolution bill. What does that look like in practice the state just picks up and leaves? Old board members are reinstated new politics rolled back?
What stops the state from trying to do this again? If Disney wins the suit can they stop that from happening?
They can’t actually have a court order “reinstate” a legislative act that was dissolved…so it’s a bigger mess than we are even giving it credit for…
Yeah…I “thought Better” of that…Yes they can. The act was dissolved by the new bill. If the new bill is declared unconstitutional, then everything, including its repeal of the old act, is void.
What exactly is the state subsidizing? Disney pays taxes to the counties, state corporate tax and taxes to RC.Disney is a wealthy company. They are not hiring an army of $2000 per hour attorneys to champion the first amendment. They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument. The Florida Constitution provides for these districts under the state codes including the provisions for removing said districts. This is a straight up state law battle, not a Federal issue.
There would likely be a 'cooling off' period where they can't try it again for a certain period. Meanwhile RCID can put in place restrictions to make it pointless to even try.Yeah…I “thought Better” of that…
But it doesn’t mean they can’t try another tactic…maybe even with some thought this time
Disney is a wealthy company. They are not hiring an army of $2000 per hour attorneys to champion the first amendment. They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument. The Florida Constitution provides for these districts under the state codes including the provisions for removing said districts. This is a straight up state law battle, not a Federal issue.
Er...care to back that up?They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument.
WrongDisney is a wealthy company. They are not hiring an army of $2000 per hour attorneys to champion the first amendment. They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument. The Florida Constitution provides for these districts under the state codes including the provisions for removing said districts. This is a straight up state law battle, not a Federal issue.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.