TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Lawyers representing Gov. Ron DeSantis will ask a federal judge Tuesday to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Walt Disney Parks and Resorts involving the special taxing district formerly known as the Reedy Creek Improvement District.
In an amended complaint filed in September, Disney accused the governor and other state officials of violating the company’s constitutional First Amendment right to free speech when Disney loyalists on the special district’s board were replaced with gubernatorial appointees.
According to Disney’s lawsuit, legislation altering the special district was done in retaliation after Disney’s former CEO spoke out in opposition to the state’s Parental Rights in Education law, which critics have dubbed “Don’t Say Gay.”
[EXCLUSIVE: Become a News 6 Insider (it’s FREE) | PINIT! Share your photos]
“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,” Disney stated in its lawsuit. “It is a clear violation of Disney’s federal First Amendment rights for the State to inflict a concerted campaign of retaliation because the Company expressed an opinion with which the government disagreed.”
Board members of the rebranded Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, or CFTOD, and the secretary of the Florida Department of Commerce are also named as defendants in Disney’s federal lawsuit.
Disney is asking a federal judge to declare the 2023 legislation that altered the Reedy Creek Improvement District to be unlawful and unenforceable.
In court papers filed ahead of Tuesday’s hearing on the defendants’ motions to dismiss the lawsuit, the state’s lawyers argued that DeSantis and the Department of Commerce secretary are barred from being sued under sovereign immunity.
The governor claimed he is also entitled to legislative immunity for his role in signing the legislation.
Attorneys representing CFTOD claim Disney’s First Amendment retaliation claim has no merit.
Find more reports from our News 6 Investigators on YouTube:
To support its position, CFTOD lawyers cited a 2015 Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals opinion in a case involving an Alabama teacher’s union known as In re Hubbard.
In that case, the appeals court found the Alabama state legislature did not violate the First Amendment rights of the Alabama Education Association, or AEA, when it passed a law the union claimed was done in retaliation for opposing past policy proposals.
“The First Amendment does not support the kind of claim AEA makes here: a challenge to an otherwise constitutional statute based on the subjective motivations of the lawmakers who passed it,” the Eleventh Circuit ruled.
In its motion for dismissal, CFTOD’s lawyers note that the legislation altering the Reedy Creek Improvement District was properly enacted.
“Under the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in In re Hubbard, this fact alone dooms Disney’s First Amendment retaliation claims,” CFTOD lawyers wrote.
You can listen to every episode of Florida’s Fourth Estate in the media player below: