>In a 17-page order, Judge Allen Winsor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida in Tallahassee agreed that that the change “works to Disney’s significant detriment,” but that the company could not point to the motivation behind the legislation to say it was unfairly targeted.
>“It is true that the laws did not affect all districts, and it is true (at least accepting Disney’s allegations) that Disney faces the brunt of the harm,” Winsor wrote. “But Disney offers no support for its argument that the court is to undertake line drawing to determine just how many others a law must cover to avoid ‘singling out’ those they affect most.”
>In short, Disney lacks standing to sue the Governor or the Secretary, and itsclaims against the CFTOD Defendants fail on the merits because “when a statute isfacially constitutional, a plaintiff cannot bring a free-speech challenge by claimingthat the lawmakers who passed it acted with a constitutionally impermissiblepurpose.” In re Hubbard, 803 F.3d 1298, 1312 (11th Cir. 2015).
>
>..
>
>Disney has alleged enough to show standing to sue the CFTOD Defendants.
>
>Disney has not, though, shown standing to sue the Governor or the Secretary. As to the Governor, Disney alleges traceability on two bases: the Governor’s power to appoint CFTOD board members and the Governor’s “actual control” over the CFTOD board. ECF No. 98 at 11-19. Neither basis works.
>
>To the extent the Governor contributed to Disney’s injury by appointing CFTOD board members, that action is in the past. Because Disney seeks injunctive relief, it must allege an imminent future injury, see City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 111 (1983),and it has not alleged facts showing that any imminent future appointments will contribute to its harm. **The analysis could be different if the Governor had not yet made any appointments**. 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.
>
>…
>
>Disney also lacks standing to sue the Secretary. Disney struggled to articulate any injury attributable to the Secretary. At best, it contends that the Secretary’s duties include “maintain[ing] the Official List of Special Districts.” ECF No. 94 at 17(quoting Fla. Stat. §§ 189.061, 189.012). But that list—or the Secretary’s authority in keeping it—does nothing to affect the CFTOD Defendant’s authority. Thus, even though ministerial duties can sometimes support standing, see Strickland v.Alexander, 772 F.3d 876, 886 (11th Cir. 2014), the Secretary’s list-keeping duties here do not.
I’m not a lawyer, not even an armchair lawyer. The part I bolded feels like a cop-out, and I’m not sure where in the process this judge thinks Disney had time to seek relief. But it sounds like this just lets DeSantis and the SoS off the hook, and leaves the door open for Disney to pursue claims against the board.
This is one of those fights where it’s hard to cheer for either side. Obviously, DeSantis’ culture war bullshit is awful, and I don’t expect that the board he appointed has Florida’s interests at heart. On the other hand, Disney isn’t a company I expect effective self-regulation from, and maybe it’s not the worst thing if they don’t get political control over their most profitable real estate.
The fuck? Do we even have laws in America anymore or has the right-wing facist state begun?
This is good. Disney obviously has standing and this dumb ass just moved the case out of his courtroom.
How expected. Excited to see this on the federal stage instead of the kangaroo court that is Florida’s justice system.
So Disney has a lack of standing to sue for freedom of speech/retaliation, but has standing when it comes to Citizen’s United?
More corruption from FL. How can you have standing but not standing? When you buy a judge that is how. Remember he is trump Appointed and needs to give back to the fascists in the gop.
From the article:
Judge Allen Winsor ruled that Disney lacked legal standing to sue DeSantis and the secretary of Florida’s Commerce Department on a claim of violating its First Amendment rights.
————-
Well that’s complete bullshit and should be appealed. The legislation specifically targeted Disney’s special district and effects only Disney.
Also the judge was appointed by Rick Scott and then promoted by Trump.
U.S. District Judge Allen C. Winsor
Trump appointed.
“Trump judge” in case you were wondering
Trump Judge, of course.
I thought this might happen but I really thought Disney lawyers planned to use a judge that wasn’t appointed by Trump, but I am probably missing something.
There is so much evidence that this is targeted, why didn’t they go after the Villages or Universals special district.
Seems like a good time for Disney to leave Florida, and let the state atrophy under it’s lack of leadership.
Disney should start divesting out of Florida. They are not welcome.
In case you were wondering, since the article inexplicably does not say this, yes, the judge is a Trump-appointee.
I’m sure the judge is not biased in any way. Yeah right. Didn’t have standing? Disney is the party retaliated against. Disney will hopefully appeal, they will win, but this right wing party sycophant will still be a judge. The wingnuts on the right have been maneuvering for control of the courts for years, starting to pay off
Just leave Florida they don’t want you and lots of us will never go there, it’s the arm pit of America.
This seems very Judge Cannon-y on its face….
How many layers of retaliation are we in now? How many is too many?
How I wish Disney could tell Florida to get fucked and move out of the state.
Conservative judges have no principles, legal or otherwise, only partisan instincts.
That’s weird, because that’s exactly what DeSantis did.
Maybe it’s time for Disney to relocate.
So basically it’s legal for the government to go after corporations they don’t like in Florida. If I were a major corporation, including Disney, I’d leave and take all those jobs out that state immediately…
I would be appealing this ruling.
Corrupt Trump judge does what Trump Judges do best, act corruptly.
No wonder Trump is complaining about our judicial system being partisan. He knows he can get preferential treatment from right-wing hack judges.
How is this not blatant corruption?
I imagine it would be a huge undertaking but perhaps Disney should relocate their Florida operations. No point in contributing to a system that actively wants to cause you harm unless you fall into line.
Judge Allen Winsor was nominated by President Donald Trump and confirmed by the United States Senate to serve as a federal judge on the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. He took the oath of office on September 11, 2019.
Before being appointed as a federal judge, Allen Winsor served as the Solicitor General of Florida. In this role, he was the state’s top appellate lawyer and represented Florida in legal matters before state and federal courts. Winsor also held various positions in government and private practice before his appointment to the bench.
>The judge on that point cited federal appeals court rulings which hold that when a law is constitutional on its face, a plaintiff cannot sue on free-speech grounds “by claiming that the lawmakers who passed it acted with a constitutionally impermissible purpose.”
Bizarre take, when the law is plainly UNCONSTITUTIONAL on its face. What an absolute load of bollocks.
Leave Florida, Disney should pack up and go.
Turn the land into low cost housing.
“The judge on that point cited federal appeals court rulings which hold that when a law is constitutional on its face, a plaintiff cannot sue on free-speech grounds “by claiming that the lawmakers who passed it acted with a constitutionally impermissible purpose.”
So in the United States, a law that violates the First Amendment cannot be challenged on 1st amendment grounds?
This is just straight out calvin ball.
Maybe this will serve as a lesson to big corporations donating to the GOP.
This sort of shit is the kind that can have serious reverberations. If companies don’t believe they can be protected by the law, they will not invest.
If this doesn’t get overturned by higher powers, it could have implications for all of America.
Trump judge from the federalist society if anyone was curious.
43 comments
I would LOVE to know the reasoning behind this one. They presented extremely compelling evidence.
Appeal. Move this up the courts.
First Amendment is dead in Florida.
Kick some ass, Disney.
Any legal eagles able to explain how Disney doesn’t have standing to sue? And why they wouldn’t have it.
I would love a lawyer to chime in with how Disney can lack standing on Disney losing control of the district.
Jesus. The corruption is so blatant it’s obscene.
From [Tampa Bay Times](http://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2024/01/31/judge-dismisses-disney-lawsuit-against-desantis/)
>In a 17-page order, Judge Allen Winsor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida in Tallahassee agreed that that the change “works to Disney’s significant detriment,” but that the company could not point to the motivation behind the legislation to say it was unfairly targeted.
>“It is true that the laws did not affect all districts, and it is true (at least accepting Disney’s allegations) that Disney faces the brunt of the harm,” Winsor wrote. “But Disney offers no support for its argument that the court is to undertake line drawing to determine just how many others a law must cover to avoid ‘singling out’ those they affect most.”
From the [court filing](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flnd.463456/gov.uscourts.flnd.463456.114.0.pdf):
>In short, Disney lacks standing to sue the Governor or the Secretary, and itsclaims against the CFTOD Defendants fail on the merits because “when a statute isfacially constitutional, a plaintiff cannot bring a free-speech challenge by claimingthat the lawmakers who passed it acted with a constitutionally impermissiblepurpose.” In re Hubbard, 803 F.3d 1298, 1312 (11th Cir. 2015).
>
>..
>
>Disney has alleged enough to show standing to sue the CFTOD Defendants.
>
>Disney has not, though, shown standing to sue the Governor or the Secretary. As to the Governor, Disney alleges traceability on two bases: the Governor’s power to appoint CFTOD board members and the Governor’s “actual control” over the CFTOD board. ECF No. 98 at 11-19. Neither basis works.
>
>To the extent the Governor contributed to Disney’s injury by appointing CFTOD board members, that action is in the past. Because Disney seeks injunctive relief, it must allege an imminent future injury, see City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 111 (1983),and it has not alleged facts showing that any imminent future appointments will contribute to its harm. **The analysis could be different if the Governor had not yet made any appointments**. 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.
>
>…
>
>Disney also lacks standing to sue the Secretary. Disney struggled to articulate any injury attributable to the Secretary. At best, it contends that the Secretary’s duties include “maintain[ing] the Official List of Special Districts.” ECF No. 94 at 17(quoting Fla. Stat. §§ 189.061, 189.012). But that list—or the Secretary’s authority in keeping it—does nothing to affect the CFTOD Defendant’s authority. Thus, even though ministerial duties can sometimes support standing, see Strickland v.Alexander, 772 F.3d 876, 886 (11th Cir. 2014), the Secretary’s list-keeping duties here do not.
I’m not a lawyer, not even an armchair lawyer. The part I bolded feels like a cop-out, and I’m not sure where in the process this judge thinks Disney had time to seek relief. But it sounds like this just lets DeSantis and the SoS off the hook, and leaves the door open for Disney to pursue claims against the board.
This is one of those fights where it’s hard to cheer for either side. Obviously, DeSantis’ culture war bullshit is awful, and I don’t expect that the board he appointed has Florida’s interests at heart. On the other hand, Disney isn’t a company I expect effective self-regulation from, and maybe it’s not the worst thing if they don’t get political control over their most profitable real estate.
The fuck? Do we even have laws in America anymore or has the right-wing facist state begun?
This is good. Disney obviously has standing and this dumb ass just moved the case out of his courtroom.
How expected. Excited to see this on the federal stage instead of the kangaroo court that is Florida’s justice system.
So Disney has a lack of standing to sue for freedom of speech/retaliation, but has standing when it comes to Citizen’s United?
More corruption from FL. How can you have standing but not standing? When you buy a judge that is how. Remember he is trump Appointed and needs to give back to the fascists in the gop.
From the article:
Judge Allen Winsor ruled that Disney lacked legal standing to sue DeSantis and the secretary of Florida’s Commerce Department on a claim of violating its First Amendment rights.
————-
Well that’s complete bullshit and should be appealed. The legislation specifically targeted Disney’s special district and effects only Disney.
Also the judge was appointed by Rick Scott and then promoted by Trump.
U.S. District Judge Allen C. Winsor
Trump appointed.
“Trump judge” in case you were wondering
Trump Judge, of course.
I thought this might happen but I really thought Disney lawyers planned to use a judge that wasn’t appointed by Trump, but I am probably missing something.
There is so much evidence that this is targeted, why didn’t they go after the Villages or Universals special district.
Seems like a good time for Disney to leave Florida, and let the state atrophy under it’s lack of leadership.
Disney should start divesting out of Florida. They are not welcome.
In case you were wondering, since the article inexplicably does not say this, yes, the judge is a Trump-appointee.
I’m sure the judge is not biased in any way. Yeah right. Didn’t have standing? Disney is the party retaliated against. Disney will hopefully appeal, they will win, but this right wing party sycophant will still be a judge. The wingnuts on the right have been maneuvering for control of the courts for years, starting to pay off
Just leave Florida they don’t want you and lots of us will never go there, it’s the arm pit of America.
This seems very Judge Cannon-y on its face….
How many layers of retaliation are we in now? How many is too many?
How I wish Disney could tell Florida to get fucked and move out of the state.
Conservative judges have no principles, legal or otherwise, only partisan instincts.
That’s weird, because that’s exactly what DeSantis did.
Maybe it’s time for Disney to relocate.
So basically it’s legal for the government to go after corporations they don’t like in Florida. If I were a major corporation, including Disney, I’d leave and take all those jobs out that state immediately…
I would be appealing this ruling.
Corrupt Trump judge does what Trump Judges do best, act corruptly.
No wonder Trump is complaining about our judicial system being partisan. He knows he can get preferential treatment from right-wing hack judges.
How is this not blatant corruption?
I imagine it would be a huge undertaking but perhaps Disney should relocate their Florida operations. No point in contributing to a system that actively wants to cause you harm unless you fall into line.
Judge Allen Winsor was nominated by President Donald Trump and confirmed by the United States Senate to serve as a federal judge on the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. He took the oath of office on September 11, 2019.
Before being appointed as a federal judge, Allen Winsor served as the Solicitor General of Florida. In this role, he was the state’s top appellate lawyer and represented Florida in legal matters before state and federal courts. Winsor also held various positions in government and private practice before his appointment to the bench.
>The judge on that point cited federal appeals court rulings which hold that when a law is constitutional on its face, a plaintiff cannot sue on free-speech grounds “by claiming that the lawmakers who passed it acted with a constitutionally impermissible purpose.”
Bizarre take, when the law is plainly UNCONSTITUTIONAL on its face. What an absolute load of bollocks.
Leave Florida, Disney should pack up and go.
Turn the land into low cost housing.
“The judge on that point cited federal appeals court rulings which hold that when a law is constitutional on its face, a plaintiff cannot sue on free-speech grounds “by claiming that the lawmakers who passed it acted with a constitutionally impermissible purpose.”
So in the United States, a law that violates the First Amendment cannot be challenged on 1st amendment grounds?
This is just straight out calvin ball.
Maybe this will serve as a lesson to big corporations donating to the GOP.
This sort of shit is the kind that can have serious reverberations. If companies don’t believe they can be protected by the law, they will not invest.
If this doesn’t get overturned by higher powers, it could have implications for all of America.
Trump judge from the federalist society if anyone was curious.