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

[CaptainAmerica]

I agree with this 100%. If Disney wins on 1st amendment violations then RCID is returned to its original status at least for now. The contract issues are less important in that case, but for future actions it’s still important to establish the legality of the government attempting to void a legal contract. Not as critical for Disney if they win the big ones but still important for society.

If Disney wins on 1A grounds and everything downstream of the original legislation is nullified, the judge is unlikely to rule on the merits of the subsequent claims.

 

[JAB]

Which I think would be an even more egregious ruling if that happens. Because that will give government carte blanche approval to retaliate against ANY speech it deems objectional, including protected speech.

Exactly. In a case where government officials openly admit - on the record - that legislation was retaliatory, a ruling in favor of the state would seem to say that not only is it okay for the government to retaliate against protected speech they don't like, they can also brag about it afterwards.

What judge/court wants to be the one to set that precedent?

 

[seascape]

And in a federal venue, how much will Disney be allowed to argue that these changes violate state law and the state constitution?

The Disney case is a federal case. State laws do not matter here. The US Constitution is the Supreme Law in the US and Federal Law trumps State Laws. DeSantis will lose in court since the February bill not only is direct retaliation to Disney Constitution right to free speech. The February bill allows a Board solely appointed by the Governor to set all sorts of land use requirements on Disney while not allowing any representation of the landowners or residents. If I remember correctly there was a revolution over taxation without representation somewhere in the world. If DeSantis only kept the first bill Florida could have won as Disney would be under the jurisdiction of the Counties as every other development is. Further if the State of Florida wanted they could pass a law giving all regulations of themeparks to the state but that would only subject the parks and not the resorts or Disney Springs. Florida can't pass a law which only puts Disney under a harmful set of rules while allowing their competitors to be free. That is called crony capitalism. The government should never be allowed to pick winners and the RCID is not an advantage to Disney except that they are allowed to build and pay for better roads, utilities and safety standards and end up with the Disney bubble.

Finally, where is the safest place in Florida to ride put a hurricane? Every Florida resident knows it WDW. The DeSantis Board has called for crappy state run themepark inspections, lower road construction and safety standandard for roads and forget the bubble because the Florida DOT doesn't care about beauty. Think of what the board said, if the DA is allowed to stand all they will have control of is the roads, utilities and basic infrastructure. I thought that was all the local government was ever supposed to do.

The DeSantis board must go. No governor should be allowed to dictate what you or I do with our own property as long as it doesn't harm someone else. But DeSantis and this crop of Republicans have no problem doing exactly that. It make me upset as a Republican. I used to think all Republicans had the basic belief of freedom but not Florida Republicans. Please prove me wrong. I will be at the meeting Monday. I will tell the Board how wrong they are and how they and DeSantis are ruining the Republican Party. I know it's a waste of my time but someone has to stand up for what is right and just. Please, everyone who really cares about WDW come and speak. Tell the Board to admit they were wrong and the bubble is important. Let Disney be Disney even is we don't agree politically.

 

[Chi84]

One tricky aspect of the upcoming argument is that regardless of what started this, does the government have a legitimate interest in regulating a large private land development?

Yes, we know what brought RCID to DeSantis’ attention but, once it was brought to his attention, does the State of Florida have a valid reason for overseeing RCID?

This is where the judge you draw is critical. Some will view this as a clear violation of Disney’s protected rights. With Judge Walker assigned to the case, it’s 100% certain that this is how he will rule. Disney has already won the initial round before it even starts.

Others will say that regardless of what started this, Florida has a legitimate reason for overseeing RCID. This is where seeing what justices are assigned on appeal is crucial.

This is more complex than calling balls and strikes at a baseball game (to use Chief Justice Roberts’ analogy). There often are valid conflicting arguments, and a judge has to balance these using their own interpretation of which should be given more weight.

Ever since the Harry Reid nuked the 60 Vote Rule in 2013, federal judges generally are more partisan than they were previously.

It’s important to note that Judge Walker was confirmed unanimously before the rule change, so no one can accuse him of bias.

However, the same won’t necessarily be true on appeal.

Disney actually covered this is pars. 131-137 of its complaint and in its statement immediately after the Board was announced. It said it had worked with the RCID board for over 50 years and expected to continue a good relationship with the new board. Then the new board showed its real purpose, making the current litigation necessary.

 

[danlb_2000]

A ruling against Disney’s 1A rights wouldn’t necessarily have any bearing on Citizens United. The Citizens United ruling declared that political donations from corporations is considered free speech. Corporations have had free speech rights long before Citizens United.

The legal issue is that none of the laws literally restrict Disney‘s speech. The laws chill Disney’s speech via retaliation.

I think the courts should absolutely consider retaliatory intent when considering the legality of the legislation but I’m not deciding the case . This case has some similarities to other cases but also significant differences. We can only wait and see.

No law can literally restrict speech, it can only punish for that speech.

 

[Andrew C]

CNN reporting House Speaker McCarthy (R) says DeSantis should sit down w/Disney and end feud, threat to build prison next to WDW "not a good idea."

The speaker is smart...

 

[seascape]

One tricky aspect of the upcoming argument is that regardless of what started this, does the government have a legitimate interest in regulating a large private land development?

Yes, we know what brought RCID to DeSantis’ attention but, once it was brought to his attention, does the State of Florida have a valid reason for overseeing RCID?

This is where the judge you draw is critical. Some will view this as a clear violation of Disney’s protected rights. With Judge Walker assigned to the case, it’s 100% certain that this is how he will rule. Disney has already won the initial round before it even starts.

Others will say that regardless of what started this, Florida has a legitimate reason for overseeing RCID. This is where seeing what justices are assigned on appeal is crucial.

This is more complex than calling balls and strikes at a baseball game (to use Chief Justice Roberts’ analogy). There often are valid conflicting arguments, and a judge has to balance these using their own interpretation of which should be given more weight.

Ever since the Harry Reid nuked the 60 Vote Rule in 2013, federal judges generally are more partisan than they were previously.

It’s important to note that Judge Walker was confirmed unanimously before the rule change, so no one can accuse him of bias.

However, the same won’t necessarily be true on appeal.

I agree with you on this. That is why I believe the best case Florida can present is the first bill was constitutional. Disney does not have the constitutional right to their own government. They need to follow the same rules and regulations as Universal, SeaWorld and others. They need to follow the sames rules as other hotel and restaurants and shopping centers. Where Florida loses is they want more and that is why the February bill has no chance of survival. It went too far in taking control of WDW. The only 3 possible outcomes I can see. First, the original bill stands, the RCID is dissolved and the debt is given to the counties but the State pays the bill in a new bill. Second, Disney wins everything and the RCID is restored as it was. Third, Disney decides to end the district voluntarily, pays the bonds and goes under the jurisdiction of the Counties, which of course want to work with Disney for development, jobs and taxes. Disney doesn't need the RCID but it is still beneficial for the counties and does give us the Disney bubble.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Disney actually covered this is pars. 131-137 of its complaint and in its statement immediately after the Board was announced. It said it had worked with the RCID board for over 50 years and expected to continue a good relationship with the new board. Then the new board showed its real purpose, making the current litigation necessary.

But there is no guarantee or right to cooperative local officials. The decision of who sits on the board, if the change is considered valid, are more of a state issue.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I agree with you on this. That is why I believe the best case Florida can present is the first bill was constitutional. Disney does not have the constitutional right to their own government. They need to follow the same rules and regulations as Universal, SeaWorld and others. They need to follow the sames rules as other hotel and restaurants and shopping centers. Where Florida loses is they want more and that is why the February bill has no chance of survival. It went too far in taking control of WDW. The only 3 possible outcomes I can see. First, the original bill stands, the RCID is dissolved and the debt is given to the counties but the State pays the bill in a new bill. Second, Disney wins everything and the RCID is restored as it was. Third, Disney decides to end the district voluntarily, pays the bonds and goes under the jurisdiction of the Counties, which of course want to work with Disney for development, jobs and taxes. Disney doesn't need the RCID but it is still beneficial for the counties and does give us the Disney bubble.

There is no outcome of this litigation where Disney’s operating facilities fall under the jurisdiction of the counties. Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista still exist.

And can we stop with this “same rules” nonsense? Universal doesn’t even follow the same rules as Universal because they now operate in two different jurisdictions. Local rules are the rules that are different. Disney as a business wasn’t exempt from state rules.

 

[Disorbust]

But DeSantis and this crop of Republicans have no problem doing exactly that. It make me upset as a Republican. I used to think all Republicans had the basic belief of freedom but not Florida Republicans. Please prove me wrong. I will be at the meeting Monday. I will tell the Board how wrong they are and how they and DeSantis are ruining the Republican Party. I know it's a waste of my time but someone has to stand up for what is right and just

Thank you for posting this. It gives me some hope that the Republican Party will become healthy again in the future.

 

[Heppenheimer]

The Disney case is a federal case. State laws do not matter here. The US Constitution is the Supreme Law in the US and Federal Law trumps State Laws. DeSantis will lose in court since the February bill not only is direct retaliation to Disney Constitution right to free speech. The February bill allows a Board solely appointed by the Governor to set all sorts of land use requirements on Disney while not allowing any representation of the landowners or residents. If I remember correctly there was a revolution over taxation without representation somewhere in the world. If DeSantis only kept the first bill Florida could have won as Disney would be under the jurisdiction of the Counties as every other development is. Further if the State of Florida wanted they could pass a law giving all regulations of themeparks to the state but that would only subject the parks and not the resorts or Disney Springs. Florida can't pass a law which only puts Disney under a harmful set of rules while allowing their competitors to be free. That is called crony capitalism. The government should never be allowed to pick winners and the RCID is not an advantage to Disney except that they are allowed to build and pay for better roads, utilities and safety standards and end up with the Disney bubble.

Finally, where is the safest place in Florida to ride put a hurricane? Every Florida resident knows it WDW. The DeSantis Board has called for crappy state run themepark inspections, lower road construction and safety standandard for roads and forget the bubble because the Florida DOT doesn't care about beauty. Think of what the board said, if the DA is allowed to stand all they will have control of is the roads, utilities and basic infrastructure. I thought that was all the local government was ever supposed to do.

The DeSantis board must go. No governor should be allowed to dictate what you or I do with our own property as long as it doesn't harm someone else. But DeSantis and this crop of Republicans have no problem doing exactly that. It make me upset as a Republican. I used to think all Republicans had the basic belief of freedom but not Florida Republicans. Please prove me wrong. I will be at the meeting Monday. I will tell the Board how wrong they are and how they and DeSantis are ruining the Republican Party. I know it's a waste of my time but someone has to stand up for what is right and just. Please, everyone who really cares about WDW come and speak. Tell the Board to admit they were wrong and the bubble is important. Let Disney be Disney even is we don't agree politically.

If I lived in Florida, I would join you.

I'd like to believe at least some of the Republican Party I was once a member of still exists.

 

[mmascari]

does the government have a legitimate interest in regulating a large private land development?

does the State of Florida have a valid reason for overseeing RCID?

Those are two different statements of oversight.

But, in either case I would ask if there is any example of an oversight that the existence of RCID prevents?

It's not like roads in RCID can just ignore all FDOT regulations. So, the state is already providing oversight.

Likewise for environmental impacts.

RCID does provide oversight of stuff like what is built where within the district. Is there some state oversight required for the same topic? Is there any other location within the state where they provide this oversight? For that matter, if the state should be providing that oversight, they should be providing it everywhere within the state not just in this one district.

Which brings us back to the original question. Is there any state wide oversight concern that that the existence of RCID restricts or interferes with?

 

[flynnibus]

If Disney wins on 1st amendment violations then RCID is returned to its original status at least for now. The contract issues are less important in that case, but for future actions it’s still important to establish the legality of the government attempting to void a legal contract

If disney gets 4c and 9b thrown out… the court could just entirely skip ruling on the others because it would be moot to the parties in the case.

 

[Chi84]

Yes, we have seen Disney’s side of the argument.

Even if we agree with it, the other side gets to present their case.

A partisan judge is not necessarily going to agree with Disney’s argument.

Recent news stories suggest we’ve seen some justices accept all sorts of arguments, as long as it gets them to the ruling they want to reach.

I’m sure you’ve been in court where you know you are absolutely screwed with certain judges before you say a word.

I was just referring to the part where Disney admits in its own pleading that the state has a valid interest in overseeing how its special districts are run.

Of course the other side gets to present its case, but it will be awhile before that happens, so in the interim we're speculating as to what that will be and how successful it will be.

Analyzing precedent is also very difficult; the well-established principle in this country is that government is not authorized to use its official power to punish citizens for their political speech and this extends to corporations. I've read many cases and haven't seen one where a government official was so brazen about using the legislature to punish and control speech. Most of the cases involve subtle actions that need to be analyzed to determine whether the right to free speech was impacted. Here, we know what was done and why and are looking at precedent to see if there's a way it can be justified under current principles of law. In short, this case is different.

The remainder of your post makes me sad. It is true - and has always been true - that judges have ideological leanings. They are human beings with beliefs, values and experiences that come to bear on their rulings. But federal judges in particular are highly qualified lawyers who take pride in their ability to analyze the law and apply legal precedents to their rulings. Implying that any judge on that level will make a decision based on politics without considering the issues is not fair.

State court judges are more of a wildcard when it comes to qualifications, but I'm not even comfortable with the idea that the Florida courts would immediately come out in favor of the state on this issue. I'm aware that things are changing, but I hope our judges still have some principles.

 

[tissandtully]

Some good charts in here, it's also funny how the anchors are just confused at the whole fight, like everyone else seems to be

 

[wdwmagic]

CNN reporting House Speaker McCarthy (R) says DeSantis should sit down w/Disney and end feud, threat to build prison next to WDW "not a good idea."

Sitting down to end feud only works when both sides are interested in a resolution. It is quite obvious here that DeSantis just wants destruction of Disney because they dared to speak up against him.

 

[tissandtully]

Sitting down to end feud only works when both sides are interested in a resolution. It is quite obvious here that DeSantis just wants destruction of Disney because they dared to speak up against him.

It would also go against his "Never Back Down" philosophy.

 

[GoofGoof]

If disney gets 4c and 9b thrown out… the court could just entirely skip ruling on the others because it would be moot to the parties in the case.

They could but it’s also possible those rulings are overturned on appeal. I would hope the judge rules on each complaint separately even if winning 4 and 5 makes 1, 2 and 3 unnecessary. Then on appeal if for some reason 4 and 5 are overturned the first 3 stick.

 

[GoofGoof]

Which I think would be an even more egregious ruling if that happens. Because that will give government carte blanche approval to retaliate against ANY speech it deems objectional, including protected speech. Especially when government is headed by someone as thin skinned as the Florida governor.

Yeah I agree, but it doesn’t make it any less likely to occur I would hope the merits of this case make it difficult to overturn on appeal but it appears that is what will decide the true final outcome. The initial case looks very promising for Disney.

 

[Chi84]

They could but it’s also possible those rulings are overturned on appeal. I would hope the judge rules on each complaint separately even if winning 4 and 5 makes 1, 2 and 3 unnecessary. Then on appeal if for some reason 4 and 5 are overturned the first 3 stick.

It doesn’t work that way, or at least it’s not supposed to. Judges are supposed to decide cases on the narrowest grounds possible. They are supposed to dispose of cases, not issue advisory opinions. Any rulings not necessary to disposition of the case would be treated as dicta. (Or if your from Chicago, “ditka.”)