Disney Checkmates DeSantis

[butters]

Iger spoke at length about the company's situation in Florida where it operates four theme parks, two waterparks, numerous hotels, and the large Disney Springs shopping district.

amongst a whole host of details, there was this, too

The company has over 75,000 employees in the state and attracts "tens of millions of people" to Florida.

he dealt with why Disney pays so much property tax etc..., RICO, and how if this was about leveling the playing field as desantis claims then there are many other special areas like Daytona and The Village which should also be targeted. He finished up speaking about the $17B over ten years planned investment in florida and with this:

"We operate responsibly. We pay our fair share of taxes. We employ thousands of people and by the way, we pay them above the minimum wage substantially above the minimum wage dictated by the state of Florida. We also provide them with great benefits and free education, so I’m gonna finish what is obviously kind of a long answer by asking one question. Does the state want us to invest more, employ more people and pay more taxes or not?"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...1&cvid=5cdf721402cc4d20e6d5f4ee9618fb02&ei=31

 

[Lazaran]

amongst a whole host of details, there was this, too

he dealt with why Disney pays so much property tax etc..., RICO, and how if this was about leveling the playing field as desantis claims then there are many other special areas like Daytona and The Village which should also be targeted. He finished up speaking about the $17B over ten years planned investment in florida and with this:


https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...1&cvid=5cdf721402cc4d20e6d5f4ee9618fb02&ei=31

Now that ^ is a mic drop.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Lol, the Shaivo case was found unconstitutional because the State couldn't prove she was still alive.

You cannot mandate that which is impossible. If Shaivo was dead, a law will not ressurect her and maintaining her condition was a violation of the 8th Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. THAT is why the SCOTUS ordered the Florida courts to not accept any further filings in that matter, not because the State didn't have the power to enact the law.

OTOH, the Shaivo case PROVES BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that the State can, and has, passed legislation aimed at specific individuals (let alone corporations) and such laws are presumed valid. (see eg; "Chevron Deference.")

So you got nothin'.

Ok, so the case that has nothing to do with this one, didn’t do what you claimed it did, and was found unconstitutional is all you’ve got.

It’s a wonder you no longer practice.

 

[DeluxAuto]

And teh Constitution is superior to any State law.

"Perfectly Legal"? Teh United States Constitution sez differently!
No. Law. Can. Affect. Existing. Contracts.

Sound the words out. Ask for help if needed.



You must've still been in rehab the day your unaccredited law school discussed teh Contracts Clause.

"He tries sooooo hard!"

Final Score: Downsouth 1, Purported Attorney 0

*Derpy has left the chat*

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

The Ratcatcher​

In an exclusive interview with The American Conservative, Florida’s Ron DeSantis explains his war with Disney for the soul and sovereignty of America.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-ratcatcher/

 

[DeluxAuto]

The Ratcatcher​

In an exclusive interview with The American Conservative, Florida’s Ron DeSantis explains his war with Disney for the soul and sovereignty of America.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-ratcatcher/

The fact that a governor has a "war" with the biggest tourist attraction in his state of inbreds tells you all you need to know about his lack of integrity.

 

[Lazaran]

•
DeSantos has Little (Cro-Magnon) “man” syndrome and is trying to prove “something” to a “republican” base of Neanderthals.





BabyBoobs

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

The fact that a governor has a "war" with the biggest tourist attraction in his state of inbreds tells you all you need to know about his lack of integrity.

#DesantisAuto

 

[DeluxAuto]

#DesantisAuto

Hash tags don't work here, genius, but your irrelevant post googles to this;

Florida's governor is proposing a law that would protect drivers who kill or injure people if they're fleeing a 'mob,' following a spate of incidents of people driving through protest crowds

Desantis advocating murder since 2020.

 

[zipman]

Ummm, yeah, ok you go ahead and believe what you want to believe. And, after Disney concedes and DeSantis picks up a check for his legal fees from them, I'll come back and say I told you so.

But when Disney doesn't do that, will you be man enough to come back and admit you were wrong?

 

[RoryN]

But when Disney doesn't do that, will you be man enough to come back and admit you were wrong?

We know the answer to this already.

 

[HisArpy]

Ok, so the case that has nothing to do with this one, didn’t do what you claimed it did, and was found unconstitutional is all you’ve got.

It’s a wonder you no longer practice.

Lol, it's like you're stupid or something because you keep reiterating things which are flatly incorrect.

The Shaivo case absolutely proves that the State can write legislation against single individuals (and corporations are deemed to be legal individuals) and it would be lawful. Thus it applies to the Disney issue whereby the state can, and did, write a law against a single entity. Have you noticed that Disney isn't challenging the law on that basis? Ever stop yourself from saying something stupid first and wonder WHY NOT?

Re: The Shaivo case outcome. That the court didn't stop the doctors from pulling the plug was because the family didn't prove that Terri was still alive. Not because the law wasn't valid. Please get it together and try to keep your head in the game long enough for that to sink into your last few brain cells and stick there.

 

[HisArpy]

But when Disney doesn't do that, will you be man enough to come back and admit you were wrong?

If Disney wins against DeSantis as an individual for actions taken by the State, I'll come here and start a thread saying I was wrong.

OTOH, we all know that whenever someone acts on behalf of the State, they don't do it in their personal capacity. So when DeSantis signed the legislation, he was doing so as Governor DeSantis, not as Ron DeSantis, an individual. That means I'm expecting a 10b(6) motion to dismiss and that it will be granted.

At which point Disney will owe DeSantis for legal costs and fees.

This isn't 100% certain, but the reality is that you cannot sue an individual in their personal capacity over their official duties on behalf of the State.

We know the answer to this already.

Can I borrow your crystal ball?

 

[RoryN]

Can I borrow your crystal ball?

No one needs a crystal ball to see how chickenshit you are.

This was established loooooooong ago.

 

[HisArpy]

No one needs a crystal ball to see how chickenshit you are.

This was established loooooooong ago.

Lol, sure. I must be so afraid of everything that I won't defend someone else at all. Not on this board, not in court, not at all.

Meanwhile that crystal ball you're holding on to tighter than a skinflint clutches his wallet looks to be saying that you're a fool. Which now makes me ask the question; is it right? Or is it broken?

Because if it's right, or if it's broken, the answer is the same - you're a fool.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Lol, sure. I must be so afraid of everything that I won't defend someone else at all. Not on this board, not in court, not at all.

Meanwhile that crystal ball you're holding on to tighter than a skinflint clutches his wallet looks to be saying that you're a fool. Which now makes me ask the question; is it right? Or is it broken?

Because if it's right, or if it's broken, the answer is the same - you're a fool.

Sure you're not chickenshit HisArpy....as I recall you've have been expanding your ignore list. Why? Because Carbon Water Boy, can't take the heat....lol

 

[Fuzzy1975]

The Ratcatcher​

In an exclusive interview with The American Conservative, Florida’s Ron DeSantis explains his war with Disney for the soul and sovereignty of America.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-ratcatcher/

lol thanks for the laugh...."war for the soul and sovereignty"...with Disney........too fucking funny.

If it wasn't for idiots like you linking in rightwing rags no one outside of the deplorable echo chamber hears of, I'd never get these little gems to laugh may ass off over.

BTW the circulation of this rag is 5000. bi monthly

 

[RobDownSouth]

Hash tags don't work here, genius, but your irrelevant post googles to this;

Florida's governor is proposing a law that would protect drivers who kill or injure people if they're fleeing a 'mob,' following a spate of incidents of people driving through protest crowds

Desantis advocating murder since 2020.

DeSantis recognizes how scared his core of supporters are.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Lol, it's like you're stupid or something because you keep reiterating things which are flatly incorrect.

The Shaivo case absolutely proves that the State can write legislation against single individuals (and corporations are deemed to be legal individuals) and it would be lawful. Thus it applies to the Disney issue whereby the state can, and did, write a law against a single entity. Have you noticed that Disney isn't challenging the law on that basis? Ever stop yourself from saying something stupid first and wonder WHY NOT?

Re: The Shaivo case outcome. That the court didn't stop the doctors from pulling the plug was because the family didn't prove that Terri was still alive. Not because the law wasn't valid. Please get it together and try to keep your head in the game long enough for that to sink into your last few brain cells and stick there.

You calling names and repeating refuted points doesn’t change anything.

Terri’s Law has nothing to do with this case.

Terri’s Law didn’t deal with just one person, it dealt with anyone who would be in a similar situation, so it wasn’t just about one person.

The law was found to be unconstitutional. No one is debating if the state can write a law, the issue at hand is wether the law is constitutional or not.

This was an absolutely awful try on your part.

 

[HisArpy]

You calling names and repeating refuted points doesn’t change anything.

Terri’s Law has nothing to do with this case.

Terri’s Law didn’t deal with just one person, it dealt with anyone who would be in a similar situation, so it wasn’t just about one person.

The law was found to be unconstitutional. No one is debating if the state can write a law, the issue at hand is wether the law is constitutional or not.

This was an absolutely awful try on your part.

You're so mixed up I'm not sure you know what day it is. Half the time you argue against your own points and the rest of the time you try to refute that the sky is blue and grass green.

I think it's fairly obvious that the State can write laws which are targeted to affect individuals/corporations. I think it's fairly obvious that Chevron Deference supports the proposition that laws passed by the State are presumed to be validly enacted. I'm nearly positive that elected officials who are acting in their official capacity enjoy immunity from suits brought against them in their personal capacity over their official acts.

That's the state of the law in the US today.

Disney fucked themselves and got hammered by new laws which stripped their special district privileges from them. They got hammered some more when the new laws also made them responsible for the corporate debts they tried to foist off on the district and the citizens. Crying that these new laws aren't fair doesn't make them any less valid. Suing the Governor in his personal capacity because Disney just can't stop the tears isn't going to fly any further than their attempted shenanigans with the transfer of power from the District Board to Corporate.

It really just comes down to the fact that Disney fucked themselves. They're STILL fucking themselves with all the crap they're trying. They've even set the stage to continue to fuck themselves for the foreseeable future at the box office and parks. Both you and Disney need to get over it and understand that the wave of the future you thought was coming was DOA.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You're so mixed up I'm not sure you know what day it is. Half the time you argue against your own points and the rest of the time you try to refute that the sky is blue and grass green.

I think it's fairly obvious that the State can write laws which are targeted to affect individuals/corporations. I think it's fairly obvious that Chevron Deference supports the proposition that laws passed by the State are presumed to be validly enacted. I'm nearly positive that elected officials who are acting in their official capacity enjoy immunity from suits brought against them in their personal capacity over their official acts.

That's the state of the law in the US today.

Disney fucked themselves and got hammered by new laws which stripped their special district privileges from them. They got hammered some more when the new laws also made them responsible for the corporate debts they tried to foist off on the district and the citizens. Crying that these new laws aren't fair doesn't make them any less valid. Suing the Governor in his personal capacity because Disney just can't stop the tears isn't going to fly any further than their attempted shenanigans with the transfer of power from the District Board to Corporate.

It really just comes down to the fact that Disney fucked themselves. They're STILL fucking themselves with all the crap they're trying. They've even set the stage to continue to fuck themselves for the foreseeable future at the box office and parks. Both you and Disney need to get over it and understand that the wave of the future you thought was coming was DOA.

No mix up here.
Your case doesn’t involve contracts and has nothing to do with this issue.

The law you cited was unconstitutional. You’re arguing against a straw man that no one else is talking about.

Do you have a case precedent for this issue, yes or no? If yes please provide it.

 

[HisArpy]

No mix up here.
Your case doesn’t involve contracts and has nothing to do with this issue.

The law you cited was unconstitutional. You’re arguing against a straw man that no one else is talking about.

Do you have a case precedent for this issue, yes or no? If yes please provide it.

Like I said, you're so mixed up you don't know what day it is. And it's obvious as hell you either didn't read about Chevron Deference, or if you did it went over your head, so every time you mouth the words "you don't have any precedent" you've lost all credibility in this debate.

I've laid out the case several times in this thread. Each time you seem to not be able to read the facts.

• Disney argued that the State couldn't pass the laws they did. Chevron says they can and those laws are presumed to be validly enacted.
• Dribble posted his opinion that the State can't pass laws targeted at individuals, the Terri Shaivo law proves that to be false. That you believe it to be invalid because the SCOTUS ordered the hospital to pull the plug is irrelevant to the issue of whether the State can pass laws targeting individuals.
• Here's another irrefutable factoid for you; if, according to Dribble brains, the State can't pass laws which target or affect individuals, the how the fuck did Disney get their special district in the first place? Answer that one and tell us that the State can't do it when they obviously already HAVE. Several times in fact. So, answer up. That is, if you can without going totally absurd while you do it.
• Finally, Disney is now trying lawfare against DeSantis by suing him in his personal capacity for acts he did while Governor in his official capacity. The law grants DeSantis immunity from suits like that so Disney's suit is going nowhere.

Those are the facts. You can run in circles all you want, but you cannot refute those FACTS.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Like I said, you're so mixed up you don't know what day it is. And it's obvious as hell you either didn't read about Chevron Deference, or if you did it went over your head, so every time you mouth the words "you don't have any precedent" you've lost all credibility in this debate.

I've laid out the case several times in this thread. Each time you seem to not be able to read the facts.

• Disney argued that the State couldn't pass the laws they did. Chevron says they can and those laws are presumed to be validly enacted.
• Dribble posted his opinion that the State can't pass laws targeted at individuals, the Terri Shaivo law proves that to be false. That you believe it to be invalid because the SCOTUS ordered the hospital to pull the plug is irrelevant to the issue of whether the State can pass laws targeting individuals.
• Here's another irrefutable factoid for you; if, according to Dribble brains, the State can't pass laws which target or affect individuals, the how the fuck did Disney get their special district in the first place? Answer that one and tell us that the State can't do it when they obviously already HAVE. Several times in fact. So, answer up. That is, if you can without going totally absurd while you do it.
• Finally, Disney is now trying lawfare against DeSantis by suing him in his personal capacity for acts he did while Governor in his official capacity. The law grants DeSantis immunity from suits like that so Disney's suit is going nowhere.

Those are the facts. You can run in circles all you want, but you cannot refute those FACTS.

Those aren’t facts, some are opinions, one was a question and some are just wrong.

Again, everything you argued has already been shown to be wrong or not true. You said you had a precedent that dealt with this case yet you can’t name one.

 

[HisArpy]

Those aren’t facts, some are opinions, one was a question and some are just wrong.

Again, everything you argued has already been shown to be wrong or not true. You said you had a precedent that dealt with this case yet you can’t name one.

How many times does Chevron Deference need to be said before you stop lying?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

How many times does Chevron Deference need to be said before you stop lying?

Say it all you want I’m betting the straw man you’re arguing against won’t respond to it.

I’m not the one who was shown to be wrong.