In a significant legal victory for Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, a federal judge in Tallahassee dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Walt Disney Co. over the state’s dismantling of the entertainment giant’s special taxing district. The lawsuit alleged that DeSantis and the state board had unfairly retaliated against Disney for criticizing state education policy.
The dispute between Disney and DeSantis’ administration began when the company criticized Florida’s Parental Rights in Education Act, which was enacted in 2022. The law aimed to restrict classroom discussions about sexual orientation and gender identity in lower grades. Critics referred to it as the “don’t say gay” law. In response, Disney expressed its opposition and stated that the law “should never have passed and should never have been signed into law.”
Disney alleged that DeSantis and the state board retaliated against the company by revoking its self-governing authority over the Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID). The RCID, which had governed the land encompassing Walt Disney World Resort, provided the company with virtual autonomy over its theme parks. However, Florida’s Republican-led government reformed the district, renaming it the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District and appointing new members to the board.
Bridgit Mendler: From Disney Star to Satellite Data Startup CEO
According to Disney, the new board members voided contracts that had been previously approved by the Disney-controlled board. The company argued that these actions were a direct result of its political positions and constituted punishment for expressing its viewpoints.
DeSantis and the other defendants in the case argued that Disney’s lawsuit should be dismissed because the state laws under which their actions were taken were constitutionally enacted. They contended that Disney could not sue them over laws that were within the purview of the state government.
Judge Allen Winsor of the U.S. District Court for Northern Florida ruled in favor of DeSantis and the state board, dismissing Disney’s lawsuit. The judge stated that Disney “lacks standing to sue the governor” and that the law being sued over was indeed constitutional. Additionally, Winsor noted that the changes to the special district worked to Disney’s significant detriment, as the company now faced land use decisions by a board over which it had no control.
DeSantis’s office hailed the judge’s decision as a victory, stating that it ended Disney’s attempts to control its own special government and receive benefits not available to other businesses in the state. Disney, however, vowed to press forward with its case, emphasizing the importance of the lawsuit for the rule of law. The company expressed concerns about the dangerous precedent that could be set if states were allowed to weaponize their official powers to punish political viewpoints they disagreed with.
Carl Weathers Dies at 76: A Tribute to Actors and Filmmakers
This legal battle between Disney and DeSantis is just one chapter in a two-year feud that started when Disney’s CEO at the time, Bob Chapek, voiced opposition to proposed legislation on gender-related issues in public schools. DeSantis championed the Parental Rights in Education bill and clashed with the company over its stance.
A group of mostly Republican former governors and other top state officials from around the country filed an amicus brief in support of Disney. They likened DeSantis’s actions against the company to the way leaders in China and Russia handle criticism and stressed the importance of welcoming debates over public policy instead of suppressing or punishing dissent.
The dismissal of Disney’s lawsuit against Governor Ron DeSantis and the state board marks a significant legal victory for the Florida government. While Disney plans to continue fighting the case, the judge’s decision highlights the importance of constitutionally enacted laws and the limitations on corporations’ ability to challenge them. As the legal battle unfolds, the implications for the rule of law and the freedom of expression in the political arena will be closely watched.
