Disney wants to narrow the scope of its lawsuit against DeSantis to free speech claim

Disney is seeking to refine the focus of its federal lawsuit against Governor Ron DeSantis, aiming to concentrate solely on a claim related to free speech. The lawsuit alleges that the Florida governor retaliated against Disney due to the company’s vocal opposition to a state law prohibiting the inclusion of discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity in early-grade classroom lessons.

In an attempt to amend its complaint, Disney recently petitioned a federal judge for approval to narrow the lawsuit’s scope exclusively to the First Amendment claim. This shift would leave unresolved questions about the legality of agreements Disney had previously entered into with the governing district of Disney World. These agreements were established during a period when the district comprised individuals supportive of Disney, prior to DeSantis and the GOP gaining control of the governing body.

The original agreements had granted Disney control over the design and construction aspects of the theme park resort. However, with the emergence of DeSantis-appointed officials on the board of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District (CFTOD), the control shifted away from Disney to these newly appointed individuals. These officials are now challenging the validity of the agreements in a state court lawsuit. Notably, DeSantis is not directly involved in this state court dispute.

According to Disney’s federal court motion, the company asserts that it is facing ongoing and substantial harm due to the actions of CFTOD’s new members and their utilization of power to penalize Disney for its political stance. The revised complaint, if granted, would seek a declaratory judgment to address what Disney characterizes as the “unconstitutional weaponization of government.” This legal action aims to secure a path for Disney’s continued operations in Florida, unaffected by what they perceive as retaliatory measures taken by the CFTOD Board.

However, U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor declined to immediately accept Disney’s request to narrow the scope of the lawsuit. This decision was made in adherence to a procedural rule that mandates discussions between the legal teams of Disney and DeSantis before such requests are submitted. Judge Winsor suggested that Disney could refile its motion after fulfilling the procedural requirement.

This development underscores the interconnected nature of the federal and state lawsuits. Disney’s filing of a counter-claim in the state case echoes many of the allegations made in the federal lawsuit, intertwining the legal courses of action. This approach by Disney followed the rejection of their request by the state court judge to dismiss the lawsuit.

The conflict between Governor DeSantis and Disney emerged after the company publicly opposed a state law known as “Don’t Say Gay,” which banned discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity in early-grade classrooms. In response, DeSantis enacted legislation that transferred control of the district to new board members, thereby limiting the authority of Disney’s previously established agreements. Subsequently, DeSantis and state lawmakers passed legislation to repeal these agreements.

For updates and further details, follow Mike Schneider on Twitter at @MikeSchneiderAP.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Legal Dispute