Can you imagine all the "space" DeSantis would get with the similar claim? The media (and the NPC) would be in ecstasy.
I dont see where I said anything close to defending what he said.... i just chimed in that the discussion of the case does not cover it correctly. Just pointing out the issue is not ripe yet for 3rd party lawsuits and Disney has not done anything yet really. So the issue is not decided yet.
In fairness, you didn't say anything to defend what he said. Its just that every post in this entire thread from you is always talking to one side, but never the other.
what side is there to take...DeSantis is just another typical pandering blowhard politician like Cruz, AOC, Cuomo, Biden, Trump... what is the difference...they always do the same dumb shit and often speak before they think. There is not one politician worthy of undying adulation I often see here
With respect to Desantis, Disney was never an issue while they were feeding his campaign and no one really complained regularly in the high office about their special incorporated city. Disney said they did not like the bill and spoke out against it and DeSantis went full snowflake and decided to go after them. Most of you are fine with this but never thought what would happen if a Dem governor went after a company the same way? typical hypocrisy. the government should not attack corporations for expressing their first amendment right....that is deep in the Constitution. Desantis just making up reasons now... oh we want disney treated like other corporations....we want fair tax laws.... was never an issue when Disney was kicking in almost a billion a year in combined revenues to the treasury . this is what politicians do and the sheeple that follow them...
Part of the problem was Disney making the statement that, not only they did not like the bill, but they would actively lobby to overturn it - essentially they "declared war" first. The governor didn't like that (nor would any politician).
Yes but lobbying is part of their first amendment right to participate in the political process. Is lobbying now illegal or worthy of government punishment? Should companies be subject to punitive measures from government if they lobby? Was Desantis upset when disney lobbied on behalf of Desantis by donating to his campaign? If a company lobbies in favor of 2nd amendment bill or opposes a strict gun control law, should the governor go after that company for being public with its opinion? Desantis didnt like it but not liking it and being a snowflake are two different things. It is a pussy move by Desantis for one reason...... pandering to a base to get him over trump for 2024....
Of course lobbying isn't illegal (whether it should be is a great topic, though). But if the Governor of a state passes a law he feels strongly about, and a corporation in his state (that has a real nice tax deal) openly says they will actively lobby against the law and make a political stand on it, is it shocking that the governor decides to challenge them back? Of course not. Lets not forget that the law has significant majority support of his constituents in his state - and they also wanted him to do something about Disney's comments.
Let's take a look at what his fellow Republicans have to say... GOP Governor Hutchinson Blasts DeSantis Over Disney Fight in Florida https://www.newsweek.com/gop-governor-hutchinson-blasts-desantis-over-disney-fight-florida-1702503 GOP governor rips DeSantis' 'punitive approach' toward Disney after parental rights dust-up Gov. Asa Hutchinson says DeSantis went against Republican principle of restrained government https://www.foxnews.com/politics/desantis-disney-punitive-approach-to-business-asa-hutchinson Most Americans—Even Republicans—Oppose Florida GOP’s Attacks On Disney https://www.forbes.com/sites/alison...acks-on-disney-poll-suggests/?sh=2b2f3da623b0 DeSantis 'may have gone too far' in battle with Disney, GOP donor says https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-too-far-in-battle-with-disney-gop-donor-says Larry Hogan calls out DeSantis over "crazy" fight with Disney Maryland's Republican Gov. Larry Hogan criticized his counterpart in Florida Ron DeSantis after DeSantis threatened to retaliate against Disney for speaking out against the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law. https://www.axios.com/2022/04/03/ron-desantis-disney-gay-larry-hogan
Not only did the Judge scold DeSantis over his election map, the judge appointed an expert from Harvard to re-draw it. Judge throws out DeSantis congressional map, orders new map drawn by expert https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article261345262.html In a swift reversal of Gov. Ron DeSantis’ bold political gambit, a Leon County Circuit Court judge on Wednesday threw out the new congressional map drawn by the governor and approved by legislators, ordering a new map drawn by a Harvard expert to be put in place. Judge Layne Smith, in a ruling from the bench after a four-hour hearing, found DeSantis’ map unconstitutional under the Fair Districts Amendment of the Florida Constitution “because it diminishes the African Americans’ ability to select the representative of their choice.” Smith, who served in the administration of former Gov. Rick Scott, was appointed to the county bench by Scott and later appointed to the circuit court by DeSantis. He said it would be up to lawmakers to decide if they want to enact a new map when the Legislature convenes for a week-long special session on May 23. But in an effort to get precincts set for candidates to qualify, he ordered a map drawn by the plaintiffs’ expert, Harvard professor Stephen Ansolabehere, to replace the one approved by the governor and Legislature. Smith said he would release a written order by Thursday, anticipating the state will appeal his ruling immediately. An appellate court could put a hold on the decision or certify it immediately to the Florida Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court for review. ‘We will undoubtedly be appealing’ The ruling is another legal blow to DeSantis, who vetoed a compromise map drawn by Republicans and then called lawmakers into a special session in April to approve a map his staff had drawn. “As Judge Smith implied, these complex constitutional matters of law were always going to be decided at the appellate level,’’ said DeSantis spokesperson Taryn Fenske. “We will undoubtedly be appealing his ruling and are confident the constitutional map enacted by the Florida Legislature and signed into law passes legal muster. We look forward to defending it.” The ruling leaves in place Congressional District 5, which stretches along the northern part of the state to link together Black communities from Gadsden County, west of Tallahassee, to Jacksonville. The district was drawn and approved by the Florida Supreme Court in 2015 after the court rejected the Legislature’s map during the 2010 redistricting cycle. But the governor and lawyers arguing on behalf of the state called it an “illegal gerrymander” that violates the equal protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution. They argued that since the Florida courts approved the 2015 map, there have been at least two rulings that undermine the protections in the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Smith acknowledged that another court might agree with them but, he added: “I’m not going to be that court. “I don’t have in front of me what I think I would need to say this violates the 14th Amendment,” he said, adding, “We have a lot of law between 1965 and now, including even on the Fair District amendments since it was enacted and added to the Constitution.” The governor’s map was fiercely opposed by Democrats, many of whom have supported a previous map drawn by Senate Republicans. They argued that the governor’s proposal was blatantly partisan and violated the Fair Districts provisions by favoring Republicans in 20 of the 28 seats and diminishing the ability of Black voters to elect representatives of their choice in at least two of the proposed districts. As a protest to the governor’s attempt to force the map through, several Democratic lawmakers staged a one-hour sit-in, temporarily shutting down the House floor proceedings and resulting in an accelerated end to the special session. Voting-rights groups, such as the League of Women Voters of Florida, and individual plaintiffs filed the lawsuit April 22 and asked the court for a temporary injunction and to order the Legislature to redraw a constitutional map. The plaintiffs argued that the district drawn by the governor’s staff, and approved by the Legislature along mostly partisan lines, violated the provisions that prohibit the state from diminishing the ability of minority voters from electing candidates of their choice. Smith ultimately agreed. “I do find persuasive the arguments that were made about the diminishment of African American votes,” Smith said. “...The district that has since been enacted and signed into law by the governor does disperse 367,000 African American votes between four different districts.” He acknowledged that the governor’s proposed Congressional District 5 may be a more compact district but said it is not in line with the minority voting rights protections in the state Constitution. He compared the value of representing diverse communities in redistricting to picking a diverse jury in a legal proceeding. “One of the reasons courts want to make sure juries represent society is that people are more confident and trusting of courts if juries aren’t all-white or all-Black or all-anything,’’ he said. “People have a right to participate and the jury looks like the community.” However, an attorney for the state, Mohammad Omar Jazil, argued that recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court have restricted the use of race as a guiding factor in redistricting cases. He said that adhering to the Fair District provisions would not be considered a compelling interest as required in the federal Constitution. “No court has ever held that complying with a state constitution is a compelling interest,’’ Jazil said. However, the plaintiffs countered that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 2019 case, Rucho v. Common Cause, that “provisions in state statutes and state constitutions can provide standards and guidance for state courts to apply.” Plaintiffs’ attorney John Delaney also suggested that Republicans delayed the process to leave less time ahead of the November elections to deliberate whether to keep DeSantis map. “This is a timing circumstance of their own making,’’ he said. “These are not naive people. They know if they delay maybe a court will be more reluctant.” Smith indicated that he considered the Legislature’s process “open and transparent” and noted that after the governor vetoed lawmakers’ map they chose not to override his veto. He rejected the plaintiffs’ suggestion that the process was intentionally delayed. “The parties in this case couldn’t have done anything quicker than they did,’’ he said, noting that the plaintiffs appealed the case swiftly. “Nobody has drug their feet in a gotcha game, I think. It’s just we have a very short period of time to get this right.” Smith said he is hoping a resolution to the case will happen quickly. “Let’s get it to the appellate court, so we can make the determination as soon as possible, so that whatever the final answer is gets out to the people that need to put this into practice,’’ he said. He said he would try to get the order released on Thursday, “and it doesn’t matter how much coffee I gotta drink to make it happen.”