Disney Suing DeSantis

[CivilDiscourse]

Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/disney-sues-ron-desantis-over-155957477.html

"A targeted campaign of government retaliation — orchestrated at every step by Governor DeSantis as punishment for Disney’s protected speech — now threatens Disney’s business operations, jeopardizes its economic future in the region, and violates its constitutional rights," Disney said in a complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.

© Copyright Original Source

Honestly? I hope Florida loses this one. They SHOULD lose this one. DeSantis and Florida taking negative government action in retaliation for speech is a violation of the 1st Amendment. I said it when this first started: https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum...ey-free-speech

It doesn't matter that Florida was revoking a "privilege". It was the fact that the negative action was taken DUE TO the speech.

This doesn't mean that Disney's actions have been rosy during this time. The self-dealing of the oversight board might end up causing a legitimate reason to dissolve the district anyways.

[Sparko]

I am a bit on the fence with this one. They are receiving a benefit that other companies do not, so that's not fair to begin with. The reason they got that benefit is because they employ a lot of people and bring in a lot of tourism. So it's a "you scratch my back and I will scratch yours" type of deal. If Disney turns against the hand that feeds it, why shouldn't they lose their benefit?

On the other hand, you are right it does feel like they are being punished for their free speech.

On the third hand (!) the constitution protects free speech of individual citizens, not corporations, per se.

[rogue06]

I am a bit on the fence with this one. They are receiving a benefit that other companies do not, so that's not fair to begin with. The reason they got that benefit is because they employ a lot of people and bring in a lot of tourism. So it's a "you scratch my back and I will scratch yours" type of deal. If Disney turns against the hand that feeds it, why shouldn't they lose their benefit?

On the other hand, you are right it does feel like they are being punished for their free speech.

On the third hand (!) the constitution protects free speech of individual citizens, not corporations, per se.

Disney couldn't be allowed to remain a separate political entity within the state. That said, everything about this stinks.

[Mountain Man]

I am a bit on the fence with this one. They are receiving a benefit that other companies do not, so that's not fair to begin with. The reason they got that benefit is because they employ a lot of people and bring in a lot of tourism. So it's a "you scratch my back and I will scratch yours" type of deal. If Disney turns against the hand that feeds it, why shouldn't they lose their benefit?

On the other hand, you are right it does feel like they are being punished for their free speech.

On the third hand (!) the constitution protects free speech of individual citizens, not corporations, per se.

Whether or not Disney was receiving a special privilege is irrelevant, because DeSantis made it clear that he was using the power of the state government to punish Disney for something they said.

And the idea that corporations do not have a right to protected speech doesn't really work, because corporations are made up of people, and those people have protected rights. It's unconstitutional to say that those people should be denied their rights just because they're part of a corporation.

[Ronson]

Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/disney-sues-ron-desantis-over-155957477.html

"A targeted campaign of government retaliation — orchestrated at every step by Governor DeSantis as punishment for Disney’s protected speech — now threatens Disney’s business operations, jeopardizes its economic future in the region, and violates its constitutional rights," Disney said in a complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.

© Copyright Original Source

Honestly? I hope Florida loses this one. They SHOULD lose this one. DeSantis and Florida taking negative government action in retaliation for speech is a violation of the 1st Amendment. I said it when this first started: https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum...ey-free-speech

It doesn't matter that Florida was revoking a "privilege". It was the fact that the negative action was taken DUE TO the speech.

This doesn't mean that Disney's actions have been rosy during this time. The self-dealing of the oversight board might end up causing a legitimate reason to dissolve the district anyways.

I've come to the conclusion that DeSantis isn't terribly bright. He's not an idiot, but he can be a bit reckless and I wouldn't want someone reckless to be POTUS.

[CivilDiscourse]

I am a bit on the fence with this one. They are receiving a benefit that other companies do not, so that's not fair to begin with. The reason they got that benefit is because they employ a lot of people and bring in a lot of tourism. So it's a "you scratch my back and I will scratch yours" type of deal. If Disney turns against the hand that feeds it, why shouldn't they lose their benefit?

On the other hand, you are right it does feel like they are being punished for their free speech.

On the third hand (!) the constitution protects free speech of individual citizens, not corporations, per se.

It's fairly simple. It's entirely a fair question to ask if Disney should have that privilege.
However, revoking it in retaliation of speech is the problem. Plus DeSantis and the GOP have made it crystal clear that the actions are in retaliation for speech.

It's like firing someone in an at-will state. You can revoke it for any reason you want, unless it's for race, religion, etc.

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/22/desantis-disney-special-status-dont-say-gay-00027302

DeSantis made clear Friday that the moves, targeting Disney’s self-governing status and a special carve-out in another law, were retribution for the company fighting against Florida’s recently enacted “Parental Rights in Education” bill, branded as “Don’t Say Gay” by opponents.

He specifically took aim at Disney pushing to repeal the law.

“You’re a corporation based in Burbank, California, and you’re going to martial your economic might to attack the parents of my state? We view that as a provocation, and we’re going to fight back against that,” DeSantis said during an event at a Hialeah Gardens charter school.

© Copyright Original Source

[Bill the Cat]

Whether or not Disney was receiving a special privilege is irrelevant, because DeSantis made it clear that he was using the power of the state government to punish Disney for something they said.

It was more than that. They used corporate dollars to say it. That removes it from being individual free speech and becomes a company leveraging its special power to make or move state policy.

And the idea that corporations do not have a right to protected speech doesn't really work, because corporations are made up of people, and those people have protected rights. It's unconstitutional to say that those people should be denied their rights just because they're part of a corporation.

No one is denying the individuals their rights. What is being rebuffed is a company putting company dollars toward forming or moving policy.

[CivilDiscourse]

It was more than that. They used corporate dollars to say it. That removes it from being individual free speech and becomes a company leveraging its special power to make or move state policy.




No one is denying the individuals their rights. What is being rebuffed is a company putting company dollars toward forming or moving policy.

Liberals made that complaint WRT to Citizens United.

Of course, this would also mean that those cities that retaliate against Chick Fil A over their donations are completely on the right side of the law.

[Gondwanaland]

Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/disney-sues-ron-desantis-over-155957477.html

"A targeted campaign of government retaliation — orchestrated at every step by Governor DeSantis as punishment for Disney’s protected speech — now threatens Disney’s business operations, jeopardizes its economic future in the region, and violates its constitutional rights," Disney said in a complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.

© Copyright Original Source

Honestly? I hope Florida loses this one. They SHOULD lose this one. DeSantis and Florida taking negative government action in retaliation for speech is a violation of the 1st Amendment. I said it when this first started: https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum...ey-free-speech

It doesn't matter that Florida was revoking a "privilege". It was the fact that the negative action was taken DUE TO the speech.

This doesn't mean that Disney's actions have been rosy during this time. The self-dealing of the oversight board might end up causing a legitimate reason to dissolve the district anyways.

Yep it's a disturbing prescedent of attacking free speech by the government.

I figured they'd sue him at some point here. looks like they waited and gave him and a number of his officials and legislative allies plenty of rope to hang themselves with by letting them make months of very clear statements confirming this was punishment for free speech and deliberately targeted..

[Mountain Man]

It was more than that. They used corporate dollars to say it. That removes it from being individual free speech and becomes a company leveraging its special power to make or move state policy.




No one is denying the individuals their rights. What is being rebuffed is a company putting company dollars toward forming or moving policy.

Are companies (which are nothing more than a group of individuals) not allowed to use their own money as they see fit?

[Mountain Man]

I've come to the conclusion that DeSantis isn't terribly bright. He's not an idiot, but he can be a bit reckless and I wouldn't want someone reckless to be POTUS.

He's not his own man. He's just doing whatever Karl Rove and the Bushes tell him to do. And I knew he was a bit of a weasel when in a debate, his opponent asked him if he would promise voters that if reelected as governor, he would serve all four years and not seek the presidency. DeSantis refused to even acknowledge the question and just stood there grinning at the camera.

[Bill the Cat]

Are companies (which are nothing more than a group of individuals) not allowed to use their own money as they see fit?

Sure, but it isn't protected speech at that point.

[Bill the Cat]

Liberals made that complaint WRT to Citizens United.

Of course, this would also mean that those cities that retaliate against Chick Fil A over their donations are completely on the right side of the law.

What special privileges does Chick-fil-A have from the government?

[Gondwanaland]

What special privileges does Chick-fil-A have from the government?

In at least one case they had a premier spot within the city airport, and the government was taking action to remove them, IIRC, due to their political positions wrt gay marriage, etc..

But the point is not really special privileges, it is the government taking punitive action toward a business for their free speech. Be that removal of supposed special privileges or removal of permits, etc., in retaliation for the speech exercised by that business or its owners.

[Gondwanaland]

Sure, but it isn't protected speech at that point.

Not according to Citizens United.