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

drnilescrane

Well-Known Member
Yes. But staying the nullification of the Agreement and impacts of SB 1604 would be primary.

The filing should/may detail what the request for an injunction includes. I haven't gotten that far in it yet.

The filing is for "DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF" so presumably they are asking for the following immediately:

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court grant the following relief:

A. Declare that the Legislative Declaration is unlawful and unenforceable because it abrogates Disney’s rights in violation of the Contracts Clause;
B. Declare that the Legislative Declaration is an unlawful taking of Disney’s property rights without payment of just compensation in violation of the Takings Clause;
C. Declare that the Legislative Declaration is unlawful and unenforceable because it was an arbitrary and irrational voiding of the Development Agreement and Restrictive Covenants in violation of the Due Process Clause;
D. Declare that the Legislative Declaration is unlawful and unenforceable because it was enacted in retaliation for Disney’s speech in violation of the First Amendment;
E. Declare that the Contracts remain in effect and enforceable;
F. Declare that Senate Bill 4C and House Bill 9B are unlawful and unenforceable because they were enacted in retaliation for Disney’s political speech in violation of the First Amendment;
G. Issue an order enjoining Defendants from enforcing the Legislative Declaration;
H. Issue an order enjoining Defendants from enforcing Senate Bill 4C and House Bill 9B;

I suspect the order chosen was in descending order of probability.

IANAL but it would be a stretch temporarily enjoining House Bill 9B and 4C considering the arrangement is already in place. But you could probably handcuff the CFTOD board until such a matter is settled.
 

JAB

Well-Known Member
Yes. But staying the nullification of the Agreement and impacts of SB 1604 would be primary.

The filing should/may detail what the request for an injunction includes. I haven't gotten that far in it yet.
"G. Issue an order enjoining Defendants from enforcing the Legislative Declaration;
H. Issue an order enjoining Defendants from enforcing Senate Bill 4C and House Bill 9B;"

Looks like they are asking at a minimum for an injunction to uphold the agreements, but are also going so far as to ask to remove CFTOB while the case is pending.
 

lentesta

Premium Member
A response.



From the article: "I think they filed in Tallahassee for a reason, because they're trying to generate some district court decision," the governor said.

Or, you know, and I'm just spitballing here, suits against the state are best originated in the district in which the state capitol resides. So filing in the Northern District avoids a court saying "you filed in the wrong jurisdiction" and delaying relief.

I'd be mildly surprised if the defense argues venue.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Or, you know, and I'm just spitballing here, suits against the state are best originated in the district in which the state capitol resides. So filing in the Northern District avoids a court saying "you filed in the wrong jurisdiction" and delaying relief.

I'd be mildly surprised if the defense argues venue.
yeah I guess he's questioning North District vs Middle? Since the District sits in the Middle District's jurisdiction... but the state house is in Northern district.

Curious to the thinking...
 

drnilescrane

Well-Known Member
yeah I guess he's questioning North District vs Middle? Since the District sits in the Middle District's jurisdiction... but the state house is in Northern district.

Curious to the thinking...
It's just him trying to muddy the waters by suggesting that Disney somehow is forum shopping. Like doubling down on the special privileges, not following the law rhetoric. Which will probably be their (amateur) argument in front of the judge.
 

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
"G. Issue an order enjoining Defendants from enforcing the Legislative Declaration;
H. Issue an order enjoining Defendants from enforcing Senate Bill 4C and House Bill 9B;"

Looks like they are asking at a minimum for an injunction to uphold the agreements, but are also going so far as to ask to remove CFTOB while the case is pending.

But would a court agree to an injunction for H? The new District and Board are already in place. What it could do is prevent the Board from taking any further action until the case is decided. You know the state will appeal any and all injunctions.
 

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
From the article: "I think they filed in Tallahassee for a reason, because they're trying to generate some district court decision," the governor said.

Or, you know, and I'm just spitballing here, suits against the state are best originated in the district in which the state capitol resides. So filing in the Northern District avoids a court saying "you filed in the wrong jurisdiction" and delaying relief.

I'd be mildly surprised if the defense argues venue.

The governor, i.e., the state, is being sued. ND of Florida would be the appropriate jurisdiction.
 

tissandtully

Well-Known Member
It's just him trying to muddy the waters by suggesting that Disney somehow is forum shopping. Like doubling down on the special privileges, not following the law rhetoric. Which will probably be their (amateur) argument in front of the judge.
The governor does the same thing all the time, look at the cases he's lost at first and then won at appeal because he said "oh we'll find a better judge".
 

mkt

When a paradise is lost go straight to Disney™
Premium Member
From the article: "I think they filed in Tallahassee for a reason, because they're trying to generate some district court decision," the governor said.

Or, you know, and I'm just spitballing here, suits against the state are best originated in the district in which the state capitol resides. So filing in the Northern District avoids a court saying "you filed in the wrong jurisdiction" and delaying relief.

I'd be mildly surprised if the defense argues venue.
Of course, he's speaking to his base that is mostly ignorant on how the law works.
 

GimpYancIent

Well-Known Member
Will this suit impact any daily operations/communications between Disney and RCID? The two work hand in hand on a daily basis.
OK people, let go of the "RCID" references. When talking about current business / communications it is now with the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District (CFTOD for short). I know its hard and painful but time to move on. After all the legal wrangling and rhetoric is done it will be the CFTOD. Just saying.
 

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
And outside of FL, "conservative" doesn't necessarily mean pro-DeSantis, a lot of them might favor "laissez-faire," and that would favor Disney's case.
If traditional conservatism hasn't yet been completely subsumed by the MAGA branch, I predict this fight DeSantis has picked will probably emerge as a wedge issue on the right. I can already see it my own family. The more business-oriented members, who generally despise Fox News, are outraged by what the Florida government has done, and are even more disturbed that people think DeSantis is fit to be president. And those who have Fox as their default news source (even those that live in Canada...)... "We have to protect the children!!!!"
 

lentesta

Premium Member
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.

I mean, their first three arguments in the filing are Contracts Clause, 5th Amendment, and 14th Amendment. They led with those.

But all that aside - and they're going to win on at least 2 of those 3 - so what if it's just a 1A issue? We're not talking about a local parking regulation. It's the First Amendment, one of the fundamental things that make us, us. And it specifcially prohibits the government from penalizing speech it doesn't like - that's the sole purpose of an entire clause in the amendment. It's one of the two reasons why we speak American, not English (the other is the French navy, obviously.)
 

Figgy1

Well-Known Member
OK people, let go of the "RCID" references. When talking about current business / communications it is now with the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District (CFTOD for short). I know its hard and painful but time to move on. After all the legal wrangling and rhetoric is done it will be the CFTOD. Just saying.
1 That's an unknown at this point
2 Some here still call DS DTD, DHS MGM.......................................;)
 

Andrew C

You know what's funny?
If traditional conservatism hasn't yet been completely subsumed by the MAGA branch, I predict this fight DeSantis has picked will probably emerge as a wedge issue on the right. I can already see it my own family. The more business-oriented members, who generally despise Fox News, are outraged by what the Florida government has done, and are even more disturbed that people think DeSantis is fit to be president. And those who have Fox as their default news source (even those that live in Canada...)... "We have to protect the children!!!!"
Lots of overlapping issues here...when looking beyond this specific Disney fight. You will see a lot of split support depending on the topic.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom