The last time Ron DeSantis spoke out about the lawsuit that had been filed against him by Walt Disney World, he suggested that Disney should drop the suit. Somewhat surprisingly, the company has now dropped nearly all of its claims in the federal lawsuit against the governor and his self-appointed Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, but not because of the governor’s suggestion. It appears the theme park conglomerate is just focusing on the federal lawsuit's key claim, and leaving everything else for state court.
Disney World’s case in Federal Court is centered on a First Amendment violation. The clause claims that the law that transformed the previous WDW special district into the current one, which gave the governor sole authority to name board members, was an act of retaliation for Disney using it’s First Amendment right to free speech when it voiced opposition to Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law. The suit did cover other bases, however, including Contracts, Takings, and Due Process violations. It’s this set of issues that have now been dropped from the Federal lawsuit, but only because they're all going to be dealt with in a separate lawsuit in state court.
Following Disney World’s initial lawsuit, the resort was sued by the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District over a land deal the entity made with the board of the Reedy Creek Improvement District, the earlier incarnation of the special district that oversees WDW. After the House of Mouse failed to get that lawsuit dismissed, it countersued the CFTOD, citing many of the same claims that it made in Federal court. In court documents (via THR), Disney says that it is simply trying to make the situation more efficient, and rather than argue the same issues twice, it will shift the non-first Amendment-related claims to state court.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the move by the entertainment giant is likely about more than simply efficiency. Ron DeSantis has asked to have himself removed from the lawsuit based on a claim of sovereign immunity, the idea that a government official cannot be sued for performing the duties of their office.
Disney World countered that when the action taken violates the U.S. Constitution, as it would if this is a First Amendment violation, sovereign immunity does not apply. By removing the other issues at hand, the resort is making the federal case entirely about that question, which may help prevent the suit from being dismissed.
In a statement shared with THR, the House of Mouse said it fully intends to fight the other issues in state court, as losing the contracts may result in Walt Disney World not investing in Florida in the way it had planned. Disney CEO Bob Iger previously mentioned plans to spend billions and bring 10,000 new jobs to WDW over the next several years, but those plans could change if Florida’s various new laws make doing business in the state tougher than in the five other locations in the world where the company has theme park resorts. A plan to move thousands of cast members from California to Florida, including the bulk of Walt Disney Imagineering, has already been canceled by the company. Time will tell how this all plays out.
