Disney scraps plans for new Florida campus, mass employee relocation amid DeSantis feud

Never underestimate a poster's ability to wallow in ignorance and/or crave attention.

 

Can you post what @gator_lawyer has posted. He/she will not allow me to see their position…

 

There have been a legion of his posts. Since you asked, I’d like to be able to search for you, but I don’t have the time. He posts quite often.

One potential path to DeSantis victory is by establishing the elimination of 4 of the > 1800 special districts in Florida was not directed at Disney. There is support for this, although the public commentary by DeSantis and his puppets offer them no aid. Another possible path is the fact that Reedy Creek itself was not ultimately eliminated, but rather was reconstituted with a new Board. The issue will be whether the change was rational to State interest, or was it part and parcel of unlawful retaliatory actions. Again. DeSantis press releases potentially undermine his legal position.

The remainder of the case is not First Amendment, but land-use government legal issues. There the focal point is whether Disney properly dotted their “i’s” in passing contractual amendments with restrictive covenants. Disney says it did; DeSantis says Disney did not, and of course, followed up with more retaliatory actions in Disney’s actual operations.

 

Curious your thoughts. Can a government employee have the expectations of not being fired or demoted if they go and push a false narrative about their superior?

Maybe I am wrong. But sure seems like that is fair for both sides.

I don’t deny that DeSantis initiated consequences. But I have yet to see a sound legal argument for Disney and the First Amendment. Disney is not stopped from Speaking. Now because they have special privileges…it would be wise of them to maybe keep their disagreements with the entity they have special privileges with private. Especially when the disagreement leads to them pushing a false narrative.

We all have the Right like Disney to say as we please. Just like we and others have the right to not like what was said and act accordingly within the Constitution.

 

You are wrong. The official plan was announced 22 months ago, yet they have been wavering for "quite some years?" Lol Maybe they never officially announced plans and went back and forth internally, because what corporation doesn't do that on expansions this big?

They had already moved some Imagineers over to Florida. All development and design plans were finished. The Orange County Development Review Committee just unanimously voted on April 1st to approve the project. The campus was literally one step away from starting permitting.

The plans originate to 2019, but COVID delayed the original plans and move, but Disney never announced anything anyway. In 2020, the state gave them tax breaks to entice them to complete the decision to move.

The only wavering has been from Imagineers starting a concerted effort to get Disney to reverse the campus because of Desantis, but Disney never said anything and kept moving forward all the way to the permitting process.

All signs point to Desantis as the reason for the cancellation, loss of revenue, loss of jobs, etc, etc.

 

Another cute ad hominem. Can’t argue the topic post…

 

I am focused on the First Amendment because that is what others keep bringing up. I am certainly not up to date on the legal side of the land use disagreement…

 

It would be better if you didn't try to lie. I posted already that Iger was thinking of delaying/cancelling this project back in November. Add in the stock being down 50% since the move was announced, the layoff of thousands of employees and the loss of thousands of subscribers and any normal person would conclude it's wise to not spend on capital outflows until the balance sheet is more solid. But hey, back to your bashing.

 

You’re being circular. First, you have seen sound legal arguments. They are littered throughout this very thread. But you revert back to your argument that there are “consequences” for exercising the right to free speech, including the right of the government to retaliate. It seems time that you are either having a difficult time appreciating the differences between private retaliation (for example, a corporation retaliating against someone for speech - likely legal depending on the act of retaliation, with GOVERNMENTAL retaliation - a no-no that is embedded into the very First Bill of Rights, and the core right that forms the bedrock of this Country’s freedom.

Or, you are being obtuse and refuse to accept the premise that government cannot retaliate against an individual for exercising free speech.

Or, you don’t understand the definition or scope of the word, retaliation.

But, to sum it up using your own words in your last paragraph — we can say what we please, and DeSantis doesn’t need to like what we say. He just cannot use the arm of the government to strike out against us for saying what he doesn’t like.

 

This question is completely inapposite to the Disney issue. The employee works for the government and is guided by different principles, and different duties. This falls under the purview of employment law, and a specialty therein. Suffice it to say, the question lacks any degree of facts to afford a good response (one which I probably don’t know off the top of my head).

 

No. We can say what we please. If it is false and a lie...their can be consequences. Did Florida and DeSantis miss a t or i to cross/dot when deciding how to deal with the lie Disney decided to peddle? Maybe. But it appears you acknowledge my point. The First Amendment has not been violated. As I said...that is what I have been focused on here because some are trying to say the First Amendment has been violated. It has not. And you and @GatorJMDZ both seem to understand they do not have a First Amendment case. They might have a legal land use case based on things that I certainly do not have the time or interest to jump into. But Disney is Free to continue and Speak the way they please.

I am a little surprised both sides took it to this point. We are probably closer to agreement on most of it than you think.

Now I agree. The government cannot retaliate/throw you in jail for saying things it disagrees with or finds offensive just because. Seen plenty of videos where cops overstep their authority because a citizen is an &$$. But this case is just a business receiving special privileges and then peddling a lie about the State providing those privileges. A government employee lies about their superior...there can be consequences.

 

What lie to do you believe Disney decided to peddle?

 

"Don't Say Gay"

This was the narrative the msm wanted to push and labeled a Parental Rights Bill that was focused on K-3. It is malicious and absolutely a lie to what the bill is about.

template 1..4 (flrules.org)

 

Bullshit, don't put words in my mouth. There absolutely is a 1A case, you just don't understand it.

 

I use this question in order to make an analogy why Florida/DeSantis did what they did. The Parental Rights Bill signed by DeSantis being pushed as "Don't Say Gay" is malicious and false narrative. So while Disney has every right to disagree with the Bill. They did not come out and say we think Parents should not have the right to protect their K-3rd grader from discussions on sexuality. They just joined the msm narrative that the bill was Don't Say Gay. That is a false narrative and hence the State did not appreciated a large entity they clearly have worked with for a long time doing such a thing.

We will see where it ends up. I am surprised it has gone this far. But to me. I do not see a First Amendment Issue here (what I have been responding to). If Disney used every expletive in the book to support their disagreement with the Parental Rights Bill in Florida. I actually would say they have a First Amendment Case potentially. But they mischaracterized the Bill. And ran with a false narrative pushed by a few.

 

Sorry. Your not taking me up on my wager for a beer made me assume you were focused on something else.

You going to take me up on the beer bet?

 

Was "Don't Say Gay" the point of their statement, or did they use those words to help people know which law they were talking about?

 

The narrative "Don't Say Gay" was a lie from the beginning pushed by those with an agenda. They need to be smarter seeing how big they are and the public influence they have for sure!

 

If the problem really is that Disney misrepresented the content of the law, why aren't they being charged with making false statements? Isn't that the normal consequence administered by the government when someone makes false statements?

 

Come on phil. You know that is not how these things play out. Sometimes yes. But most of the time it turns into a what we are seeing. Whether it be a move to remove privileges like Florida is doing with Disney. Or whether it be firing/demoting someone if we are looking at if from a worker standpoint.

This is certainly high profile though.