No issue at all with looking at special treatment for anyone or institution. That said. Biden needs to do his job when it comes to Texas. Disney is free to speak as it wishes.
Or any charity for that matter. And they get looked at as well. Shoot…The Trump Organization is being looked at. Disney is free to speak as it wishes.
If the government is going to punish them for their speech, their constitutional rights are being violated.
You are ok with reviewing any special privileges, but the key in both my hypothetical and the actual event with DeSantis is the reason for revoking them. Consider the exact same action you just condoned from the reverse perspective: President Biden will confer to Texas special public benefits as long as no Texas officials speak out against any of president Biden’s actions.
It would only be punishing if they were treated more harshly than their peers. They are free to speak as they wish. As with any speech. There can be consequences. This is not a violation of the First Amendment. It is the agenda crowd getting their panties in a wad because their propaganda to lie about the bill they did not like failed to work.
It might be entertaining indeed, but it would definitely be illegal. And that’s exactly the case of the DeSantis vs Disney episode. DeSantis has sent a signal that anyone that has a current deal with the state Florida could put that deal in jeopardy by talking against his actions.
They were treated more harshly than their peers. None of the other over 1,000 special districts had their districts withdrawn. None of the over 1,000 special districts had their special district withdrawn based upon “emergency action” with no study, economic impact, public debate, constituency feedback, or the like. Disney was punished for their speech. That’s not the “agenda crowd”, talking point, that is fact and a fact which many in DeSantis’ administration proudly boasted about.
There can be individual consequences but is not supposed to have governmental consequences. That is the whole point of the first amendment.
Yep. The law was written so that only those special districts constituted before 1968 could be sanctioned. Guess when Reedy Creek Special District was formed -- 1967.
It is not illegal. The only entity being treated differently in this scenario is Disney. They have privileges their peers do not. Now they went and peddled the lie about a law in Florida and potentially could lose those privileges. If Disney was being punished beyond the scope of being on the same playing field as their peers. Then you have a case in point. But that is not the case.
I like how you acknowledge “special” to define the situation. They are not being denied their right to speak. And you helped define that.
They have every right to speak as they wish. They may lose a privilege now for that. But that is not removing the right to speak as Disney wishes…
Haha, so much framing to deal with the cognitive dissonance of supporting the government punishing speech while not viewing yourself as the type of person who would support the government punishing speech.
There's no first amendment carve out that allows the government to revoke "privileges" in retaliation for speech it doesn't like. IOW you lose your case just by stating it.
Yep. Driving on government roads is a privilege. I doubt anybody would support pulling people's drivers licenses due to speech as a reasonable act by the government. But, again, this is all about dealing with cognitive dissonance.
Na. Just calling out reality. You and the dems are going to get your panties in a wad about anything DeSantis does. Don’t worry though. Disney can speak as much as they wish.
