ORLANDO, Fla. – A federal judge on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit filed by The Walt Disney Company against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis that accused the governor of retaliation because Disney criticized the state over the Parental Rights in Education law, known by critics as “Don’t Say Gay.”
U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor granted the state’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, finding that Disney did not have standing to sue the governor and that Disney cannot challenge a facially constitutional action by claiming a retaliatory motive.
Disney issued a statement saying it will appeal the decision.
“This is an important case with serious implications for the rule of law, and it will not end here,” a Disney spokesperson said. “If left unchallenged, this would set a dangerous precedent and give license to states to weaponize their official powers to punish the expression of political viewpoints they disagree with. We are determined to press forward with our case.”
A statement from DeSantis’ spokesperson said Disney was not entitled to special privileges, and the judge agreed.
The dispute began in 2022 when DeSantis attacked what he termed “woke Disney” in public appearances as he geared up for his since-suspended presidential campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.
State lawmakers stripped Disney of its control over the special development district that since 1967 had given the company virtual autonomy around its theme parks, including the Walt Disney World Resort. It functioned as a government, complete with open records, and allowed Disney to put in permit requests to the district, rather than deal with a county government.
The state then passed a law to rename the district the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, with a board handpicked by the governor.
Before that could happen, however, the board of the previous district made a deal that gave more power to Disney. After the state passed a law to stop that deal, Disney sued Gov. DeSantis, the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity secretary, and the board of the CFTOD. Disney claimed not only First Amendment violations, but also claimed the state’s moves violated the contracts clause of the U.S. Constitution and due process rights in a “concerted campaign of retaliation because the company expressed an opinion with which the government disagreed.”
DeSantis’ attorneys countered that Disney did not have standing to sue DeSantis because he did not have legal authority to enforce any of the laws related to the case.
Judge Winsor agreed with DeSantis, saying that since Disney was seeking injunctive relief, it must claim that there is “imminent future injury.”
“The analysis could be different if the Governor had not yet made any appointments,” Winsor wrote. “But as things stand, if this court enjoined future appointments, Disney would face the same situation it faces now: it would be operating under the CFTOD board, over which it has no control. Stopping hypothetical future appointments would not redress any alleged imminent harm.”
Disney also claimed that the laws passed that led to the CFTOD were wrong because they retaliated against the company. Winsor doesn’t say that’s untrue, however, his ruling notes that on the face of it, the laws do not violate the U.S. Constitution, particularly since they don’t even mention Disney and Disney even admits it’s not the sole landowner of the CFTOD property.
Winsor also says evidence of retaliation on the part of lawmakers beyond the text of the law is not enough.
“At the end of the day, under the law of this Circuit, ‘courts shouldn’t look to a law’s legislative history to find an illegitimate motivation for an otherwise constitutional statute,’” Winsor concluded.
In the meantime, Disney is still suing the CFTOD in state court. A hearing was held in that case earlier this month.
CFTOD members cheered Winsor’s ruling Wednesday.
114 Order on Motion to Dismiss by Christie Zizo on Scribd
Get today’s headlines in minutes with Your Florida Daily: