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

[flynnibus]

I understand that. As I said:

The only thing he could have done differently to separate himself from the situation is take no action on the bill, and let it become law without his signature.

or.. he could have... veto'd the bill in disagreement.

Disney isn't suing him for being governor... they are suing him for his explicit actions.

 

[Brian]

In his defense, he  was double dog dared to sign it. He had no other options.

I triple dog dare him to give up this stupid fight, and get Floridians some property tax relief and fix I-4 between World Drive and Hwy 27.

 

[LAKid53]

I noticed that too. She seemed perplexed that the Legislature wasn't named in the suit. Why, they were the ones who passed the bills. Her argument seemed to be that the Governor responded with his own freedom of speech which didn't hinder anyone. Don't shoot the messenger. I'm only interpreting her argument here.

Not going to. I agree that's her argument, however specious it appears.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

Is she seriously trying to get sympathy for DeSantis by crying about how big mean Disney is trying to silence him?!?!?

Yes.

 

[GrumpyFan]

I noticed that too. She seemed perplexed that the Legislature wasn't named in the suit. Why, they were the ones who passed the bills. Her argument seemed to be that the Governor responded with his own freedom of speech which didn't hinder anyone. Don't shoot the messenger. I'm only interpreting her argument here.

It is interesting that the suit named the individuals directly involved.
Might that be another approach that Disney pursues if this one fails?
Sue the legislature AND the state?

 

[Brian]

It is interesting that the suit named the individuals directly involved.
Might that be another approach that Disney pursues if this one fails?
Sue the legislature AND the state?

I don't believe one can name the legislature in a lawsuit.

 

[LAKid53]

Not necessarily, by being separately elected to a statewide office, she is not part of a "Governor's Agency" and not bound to the Governor's point of view. I agree that, her being of the same party, she is more likely to agree with him but is also not beholden to his point of view either. Before current Commissioner of Agriculture Milton Simpson took office, the prior Commissioner was Nikki Fried, a Democrat. You can be sure she didn't agree with Governor DeSantis on anything.

Charlie Crist didn't always agree with Jeb either...as the elected Education Commissioner or Attorney General.

I'd forgotten how many state jobs he held.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

I triple dog dare him to give up this stupid fight, and get Floridians some property tax relief and fix I-4 between World Drive and Hwy 27.

It seems as though the Governor doesn't recognize your authority to issue dares of any sort and, therefore, must ignore such a preposterous suggestion.

 

[JAB]

What do you think it will be? They have to come up with something. They can't just show up to court and say "We have no objections, your honor."

 

[Chi84]

I don't believe one can name the legislature in a lawsuit.

There are jurisdictional issues here. The lawsuit is brought under the US constitution. I didn’t read what she said, but was she asking why the state legislature wasn’t named as a defendant in the federal suit?

 

[Brian]

There are jurisdictional issues here. The lawsuit is brought under the US constitution. I didn’t read what she said, but was she asking why the state legislature wasn’t named as a defendant?

She didn't ask why they didn't name the legislature, at least from what I saw. I believe her argument was more a political one than a legal one (which is fair, considering she was on TV, not arguing the case before a judge) , but I infer from her statement that she is acting as though DeSantis was not involved in the retaliatory legislation coming to be.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Here's an article about that.

"Florida’s Attorney General doesn’t understand why Ron DeSantis is a defendant in Disney’s lawsuit against the state.

In comments made on Fox & Friends, Ashley Moody said she was stumped about why DeSantis was named, even though the Governor has spent weeks trashing and targeting the entertainment company in speech after speech.

She suggested that even though the Governor signed legislation changing Disney’s special district, he somehow wasn’t responsible.

“You know, it was the Florida Legislature and the Central Florida Oversight Board (SIC) that took actions that effectively eliminated special privileges or a self-governing authority of Disney,” Moody said.

“So it puzzled me, and you wonder if it was an attempt by Disney, maybe to put pressure on this Governor to shut him up, to make him stop talking about these privileges or maybe stop talking about their change in approach to kids,” she speculated, referring to the company opposing 2022’s Parental Rights in Education law."

Full article below.

Ashley Moody ‘puzzled’ by Disney naming Ron DeSantis in its lawsuit against the state

The AG said Disney was putting 'pressure on this Governor to shut him up.'

floridapolitics.com

In other words they have no defense for everything he’s said so their only hope is somehow distancing him from the case.

Most of us have been saying (from day 1) that the comments by DeSantis were guaranteeing a first amendment victory… now it looks like the AG is implying it also.

 

[Figgy1]

In his defense, he  was double dog dared to sign it. He had no other options.

You owe me a great cup of coffee and a new keyboard

 

[LAKid53]

It is interesting that the suit named the individuals directly involved.
Might that be another approach that Disney pursues if this one fails?
Sue the legislature AND the state?

Sovereign immunity would apply in that instance.

Florida waived sovereign immunity for tort actions under Section 768.28. Can the harm Disney say it has endured be considered "injury or loss of property...caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the agency or subdivision while acting within the scope of the employee’s office..."?

If so, then any monetary damages Disney would seek are limited by statute to $200,000. Any amount above that must have Legislative approval.

 

[LAKid53]

I understand that. As I said:

The only thing he could have done differently to separate himself from the situation is take no action on the bill, and let it become law without his signature.

He certainly wasn't going to veto it.

 

[mikejs78]

I don't want to edit the post quoted as it already has some "likes" and those people who "liked" the original might not like this additional thought:

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, so I can only speculate as to if there is a distinction in any relevant case law or statute which would make a distinction between DeSantis privately asking the legislature to pass a bill eliminating RCID, and DeSantis taking executive action to eliminate RCID (without the legislature's involvement). Of course, the latter would be squarely on him, but the former (which is what happened) is a little more nuanced. While he was under no obligation to sign the legislation into law, he was under no obligation to veto it either. The state will likely argue that he was merely fulfilling his constitutional obligation of acting upon a bill presented to him by the legislature.

If the state can successfully make the case that the former is different from the latter, and that DeSantis didn't initiate any retaliatory actions against Disney, the state might be able to prevail because the legislature is not named. If I'm not mistaken, they can't be.

None of this to say that it's a slam dunk argument. It's a stretch.

I understand that. As I said:

The only thing he could have done differently to separate himself from the situation is take no action on the bill, and let it become law without his signature.

Well, the other thing he could have done differently is not called the special session to do this very thing. And by the FL constitution, the legislature can only address items in the special session that are in the Governor's proclamation.

So he had that extra legal hand in it that wouldn't have been there if this had been done in general session.

 

[LAKid53]

Well, the other thing he could have done differently is not called the special session to do this very thing. And by the FL constitution, the legislature can only address items in the special session that are in the Governor's proclamation.

So he had that extra legal hand in it that wouldn't have been there if this had been done in general session.

Correct. The regular session was scheduled to begin the following month. This bill could have been handled during then. But then it would have been lost in the noise of all the other bills.

@JohnD, do you ever remember any special session so close to the start of regular session? Especially once the governor submitted his budget?

 

[Smiley/OCD]

True. My sister basically said just that when she responded to the D vs D suit yesterday with ‘OK who cares?’

I said the escalation could impact our experience at WDW. Also impacts people who like the constitution.

For background, her family is joining us this year at Poly DVC this December. Monorail to MK and Epcot could be impacted. Maybe higher taxes during the trip, specifically targeted to WDW guests. If these were born just the past 2 weeks, what else may change between now and December? Also, she works in a law office.

Point being average citizens outside Florida aren’t really motivated to understand all that’s going on here. imo Disney‘s restrained response has been a great strategy.

The people (mainly conservatives) who dislike or even HATE Disney are going to defend DeSantis’s side no matter what…and I can assure you that most will not even take 10 minutes to attempt to educate themselves on the case…

 

[tissandtully]

At what point is Disney gonna tack on defamation as well? Gov keeps lying about taxes.

 

[mikejs78]

At what point is Disney gonna tack on defamation as well? Gov keeps lying about taxes.

Very hard to sue an elected official for defamation.