Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis

Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
23 Posts 5 Posters 135 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • CopperC Offline
    CopperC Offline
    Copper
    wrote on last edited by
    #14

    If you believe that the organization is using it's influence to corrupt your children, that is enough motivation to do whatever it takes.

    Bend the law, break the law, make new laws, break the original agreement, amend the original agreement, raise their taxes, take away their authority.

    Do it all and more. Don't let them take your children.

    How could there be any question?

    1 Reply Last reply
    • jon-nycJ Offline
      jon-nycJ Offline
      jon-nyc
      wrote on last edited by
      #15

      Among every other type of relief you'd expect, Disney is asking for Florida to cover its attorney fees.

      Nice touch, Mickey.

      Only non-witches get due process.

      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
      1 Reply Last reply
      • LuFins DadL Offline
        LuFins DadL Offline
        LuFins Dad
        wrote on last edited by
        #16

        Is the lawsuit against DeSantis or Florida? It’s relevant because it wasn’t DeSantis that voted to change the Reedy Creek issue…

        The Brad

        1 Reply Last reply
        • jon-nycJ Offline
          jon-nycJ Offline
          jon-nyc
          wrote on last edited by
          #17

          Defendants are:

          • DeSantis, Gov'nah
          • Meredith Ivey, Acting Sec of FL Dept of Economic Opportunity, which oversees all the 'special districts'
          • 5 board members and the executive director of the re-constituted special district.

          Only non-witches get due process.

          • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
          1 Reply Last reply
          • jon-nycJ Offline
            jon-nycJ Offline
            jon-nyc
            wrote on last edited by
            #18

            Pretty good summary.

            Governor DeSantis and his allies paid no mind to the governing structure that facilitated Reedy Creek’s successful development until one year ago, when the Governor decided to target Disney. There is no room for disagreement about what happened here: Disney expressed its opinion on state legislation and was then punished by the State for doing so.

            Governor DeSantis announced that Disney's statement had "crossed the line" - a line evidently separating permissible speech from intolerable speech - and launched a barrage of threats to the company in immediate response. Since then, the Governor, the State Legislature, and the Governor’s handpicked local government regulators have moved beyond threats to official action, employing the machinery of the State in a coordinated campaign to damage Disney’s ability to do business in Florida.

            State leaders have not been subtle about their reasons for government intervention. They have proudly declared that Disney deserves this fate because of what Disney said. This is as clear a case of retaliation as this Court is ever likely to see.

            Only non-witches get due process.

            • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
            CopperC 1 Reply Last reply
            • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

              Pretty good summary.

              Governor DeSantis and his allies paid no mind to the governing structure that facilitated Reedy Creek’s successful development until one year ago, when the Governor decided to target Disney. There is no room for disagreement about what happened here: Disney expressed its opinion on state legislation and was then punished by the State for doing so.

              Governor DeSantis announced that Disney's statement had "crossed the line" - a line evidently separating permissible speech from intolerable speech - and launched a barrage of threats to the company in immediate response. Since then, the Governor, the State Legislature, and the Governor’s handpicked local government regulators have moved beyond threats to official action, employing the machinery of the State in a coordinated campaign to damage Disney’s ability to do business in Florida.

              State leaders have not been subtle about their reasons for government intervention. They have proudly declared that Disney deserves this fate because of what Disney said. This is as clear a case of retaliation as this Court is ever likely to see.

              CopperC Offline
              CopperC Offline
              Copper
              wrote on last edited by
              #19

              @jon-nyc said in Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis:

              There is no room for disagreement

              cute

              jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
              • HoraceH Offline
                HoraceH Offline
                Horace
                wrote on last edited by
                #20

                The room for disagreement will be decided by the courts, as always.

                That's why judges are so important. Who would like to "disagree" with Biden's own Ketanya Brown Jackson? Anybody? Hello? Beuler?

                She can't disagree with the notion that men are women. Where do you think your particular case will appear on her epistemic pantheon?

                Education is extremely important.

                1 Reply Last reply
                • jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nyc
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #21

                  It won’t get that high.

                  The most likely result is by the time this is adjudicated in district court DeSantis will have already dropped out of the 24 race and will have lost interest. Then it will get resolved more or less on Disney’s terms and he won’t bother with an appeal.

                  Only non-witches get due process.

                  • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • CopperC Copper

                    @jon-nyc said in Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis:

                    There is no room for disagreement

                    cute

                    jon-nycJ Offline
                    jon-nycJ Offline
                    jon-nyc
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #22

                    @Copper said in Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis:

                    @jon-nyc said in Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis:

                    There is no room for disagreement

                    cute

                    Normally the disagreement would focus on motive and the cause-and-effect nature of Disney’s speech and the state’s action. But rather helpfully for Disney, DeSantis and the legislature have been proudly bragging about that connection to whomever will listen.

                    Only non-witches get due process.

                    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                    HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                    • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                      @Copper said in Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis:

                      @jon-nyc said in Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis:

                      There is no room for disagreement

                      cute

                      Normally the disagreement would focus on motive and the cause-and-effect nature of Disney’s speech and the state’s action. But rather helpfully for Disney, DeSantis and the legislature have been proudly bragging about that connection to whomever will listen.

                      HoraceH Offline
                      HoraceH Offline
                      Horace
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #23

                      @jon-nyc said in Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis:

                      @Copper said in Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis:

                      @jon-nyc said in Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v Ronald D. DeSantis:

                      There is no room for disagreement

                      cute

                      Normally the disagreement would focus on motive and the cause-and-effect nature of Disney’s speech and the state’s action. But rather helpfully for Disney, DeSantis and the legislature have been proudly bragging about that connection to whomever will listen.

                      Everybody knows DeSantis is smiting an ideology.

                      As the culture war becomes indistinguishable from politics, this is how it's done.

                      Education is extremely important.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • Users
                      • Groups