The courts are the ones that held that four laws he helped pass during last session are unconstitutional lol. And there will be laws from this session that are struck down.
I have my doubts that Disney litigates this case. The Florida Legislature might end up inadvertently doing them a favor.
After reading that, provided that Disney could prove that this was retaliatory, it looks like Florida could not have done this. Not a certainty, but it looks that way. This case is unique because Disney is treated more preferentially to basically every other corporation in Florida already.
I did. You haven't provided an example of democrats doing something similar to what DeSantis is doing.
I'm curious to see how Florida ranks as far as overturned legislation goes. The Biden Administration pushed for vaccine mandates they knew are unconstitutional, I don't see people here claiming that the Biden Administration doesn't care about the Constitution. I don't see folks on the left calling him authoritarian.
Somebody's hoping for a Deputy Assistant to the Assistant Press Secretary position if Ron goes to Washington.
A Look at the Supreme Court Ruling on Vaccination Mandates | Stanford Law School "The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a Biden administration mandate that large businesses require their employees to either be vaccinated or tested once a week for the coronavirus. In a 6-3 order, the justices blocked an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) emergency rule for businesses with more than 100 employees — one that would have impacted more than 80 million workers." "The majority said Congress only intended to give OSHA the power to address hazards that are confined to the workplace setting. They distinguished COVID as being in the category of “day-to-day dangers that all face,” likening it to risks like crime and air pollution. They were willing to acknowledge that some workplaces might have such an elevated risk of COVID transmission as to make COVID an occupational hazard (for example, labs working with the virus, or highly crowded, cramped environments), but said OSHA’s rule swept in nearly all workplaces — and so went much too far."
That was an administrative law case analyzing whether there was statutory authorization for the mandate. It's apples to oranges to DeSantis repeatedly losing for violating Floridians' civil liberties.
You're moving the goal posts. This is what you initially said: I cited a case that clearly matches that description, so you narrow the issue to civil liberties.
I don't doubt Disney sold bonds to pay for improvements (roads and drainage most likely) and those bonds would then essentially become the responsibility of Orange County (Osceola too). But for the past 50 plus years, Disney has not had to pay impact fees or building permit expenses that all other businesses have had to. Those fees would have gone to the counties to pay for their inspections, fire, police etc. With the Reedy Creek gone, Disney will have to start paying those fees to essentially pay for the fire and the police and transportation and everything else that say Wal Mart would have to pay to open up a new store. Could mean anything from requiring them to pay for a new traffic signal to widening a road to increasing the size of the water or sewer lines. They probably already have some kind of deal for the power grid. Point is, they are paying for those now but none of the administrative and bureaucracy fees associated with it.
Thank goodness that Floridians have you and the fascist Governor to determine everyone's talking points. You should print a manifesto of the approved topics and positions for all to take.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a244_hgci.pdf The federal government’s powers, however, are not general but limited and divided. See McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 405 (1819). Not only must the federal government properly invoke a constitutionally enumerated source of authority to regulate in this area or any other. It must also act consistently with the Constitution’s separation of powers. And when it comes to that obligation, this Court has established at least one firm rule: “We expect Congress to speak clearly” if it wishes to assign to an executive agency decisions “of vast economic and political significance.” Alabama Assn. of Realtors v. Department of Health and Human Servs., 594 U. S. ___, ___ (2021) (per curiam) (slip op., at 6) (internal quotation marks omitted). We sometimes call this the major questions doctrine. Gundy v. United States, 588 U. S. ___, ___ (2019) (GORSUCH, J., dissenting) (slip op., at 20). OSHA’s mandate fails that doctrine’s test. This is from Justice Gorsuch's concurrence.
Do you not see a serious difference between a Public Health issue and a retaliatory action by DeSantis?
My Lord, gator_lawyer. I can point to Article I of the U.S. Constitution. You know, the one that says "all legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." Then, Court interpretations of Article I and case law broadened to the point that allows for agencies like OSHA to craft policies if certain conditions apply. The Biden Administration pushed for OSHA to exercise authority that was never granted to them by Congress, which would violate the Constitution's separation of powers. Gorsuch explicitly highlights separation of powers in his concurrence. So, OSHA acting beyond its delegated authority violates Article I, which again, Gorsuch makes a point of discussing in his concurrence. The tests regarding the legality of delegation is generally found in case law. You are a lawyer, you know all of this, which tells me you are lying.