Before handing control over to DeSantis’s cronies, the Disney Board signed an agreement that essentially strips the board of most authority, except for road maintenance and other minor duties.
In other words, DeSantis and his cronies control NOTHING of import.
An appropriate outcome. This takeover was never anything more than retaliation for Disney’s exercise of its First Amendment rights. There was zero abuse by Disney going on and absolutely no reason for this attempted takeover.
I have no use for Disney’s woke statements and I hold the general viewpoint of ■■■■ WOKE.
But the First Amendment exists and government retaliation for an exercise of free speech is patently unconstitutional.
Instead of trying to fight that long and lengthy court battle, Disney instead found this ingenious way of ■■■■■■■ DeSantis.
Sorry DeSantis, I will never support anything that attempts to suppress or retaliate for free speech and you got the proverbial slap down you richly deserved for this abuse of power.
You are free to join me in saying ■■■■ WOKE. You are not free to suppress speech by retaliation.
Yep, I’ve made note that Disney didn’t do a direct legal challenge during the transition year.
I boned it.
My thought was that the Mouse House would take the long view. Establish a PAC and work over time to replace members of the Florida legislature with those not beholden to Gov. DeSantis, and then when a new governor is in place get a revised law quietly passed. The Mouse House PAC would be quite well financed to influence the political makeup of the FL Legislature.
Of course not, but come on, admit it’s funny as ■■■■ and quite a surprise even though the transaction occurred in open meetings. Not our(C) fault no one was paying attention.
I wonder though, think Disney can afford a deep bench of good lawyers?
So…… a company is being given favorable tax positions by the governemt. Then when said company talks bad about the government that is doing it the favor, the government is in the wrong when they stop offering the company that’s bad mouthing them tax incentives.
Even if Disney was getting an advantageous tax situation, and they were not.
This act by DeSantis and the Legislature was PURELY in retaliation for protected free speech. There was no other reason whatsoever for their action. Disney never committed any abuse or misconduct with Reedy Creek.
Even a normally legal action becomes unconstitutional if done for an illegal reason, whether that be retaliation for protected speech or racial animus, etc.
Of course not. But they did Disney a “favor” 50+ years ago, anyway - a favor that benefited Florida as much or more than it benefited Disney.
Trying to take that “favor” back 50 years later because Disney dared to disagree publically with DeSantis is the sort of thing that we all used to agree was tyranny.
I don’t fully understand the relationship of the old board to Disney, but at least the media seems to think that the old board was under the control of Disney. If that is so, how could they ever make an arms length agreement if they were under the influence of Disney? It would be like Disney negotiating with itself.
That failing, obviously DeSantis has the advantages of controlling the laws. I’m not sure in the long term Disney was wise to extend this match.
I don’t care if it’s the government or mother Teresa…… if you talk ■■■■ about someone, don’t expect their continued favors. FAFO. Disney got it privilege checked.
Well, Florida isn’t unique in that. Here’s the California governor banning state business with Walgreens because it is obeying other state’s laws on dispensing drugs.
