As I said... it's not a question of 1st amendment, it's a question of STATE constitutionality. A state's legislature can pass a law, and even if that's in retaliation to something you said or did... it's still law.
The judge dismissed it without prejudice, which to those who don't know... it means it can be retried if so desired. Disney has decided to accept it though and move on.
This DeSantis/Disney feud would make a great movie. Since you live down there you probably know more about the details, but it has crazy all over it.
It was crazy that Disney had it's own government district.
It was crazy that a governor would declare war on one of the biggest employers in his state over a cultural/religious issue.
Now there are cases in state court and cases in federal court and a sex scandal among the group DeSantis appointed to run the Disney "district".
Plenty of stuff to make a movie.
There's a view the rest of the country has, and the view that Floridians have.
Disney had what was called an "Independent Special District." There are a few of these, actually... but it was something that was granted to Disney way back in the day. I don't feel like looking any of this stuff up, so I'll be vague with the numbers and go from memory. Basically... this special district was an offer from the then-Governor of Florida to encourage Walt Disney to move all his operations to Florida... which apparently before Florida even had a state constitution. I'm not sure how that's even constitutional since the Constitution states that every state must have their own constitution. Regardless... the state constitution was ratified at some point in the early 1960s if I remember correctly. And they grandfathered it in. Under the new state constitution, there's a special section that deals with independent districts, and there are several new districts that were created post-Constitution that allow for special rights. The Villages is one example, as is the system of waterways (under their own water management district) and several others. There's even one for a group of nomads and gypsies that created a Spiritualist Town in Florida. All the new independent districts conform to the state constitution, but the Disney one had been grandfathered, but did not meet the letter of the law.
For decades, no one bothered to mess with it because Disney was bringing in money for the state. This was when tourism (specifically Disney), made up a large percentage of the state's income. Tourism only makes up less than 8% of the state's total income (as of 2023). This number goes down every year. It's not that tourism is decreasing (it's actually increasing), but Florida's industry has grown exponentially over the past 10 years, so tourism isn't as important as it once was.
Florida passed a law that consequently said that books with explicit images, discussions about transgenderism, homosexuality, and sex, were no longer allowed in elementary school libraries. It also set a guideline stating that teachers could not push transgender ideologies to anyone younger than 12 (or something like that). Democrats, as part of an anti-DeSantis narrative called it the "Don't Say Gay," law... which it really wasn't. At the time, it wasn't Bob Iger, but Bob Chapek (the one who was fired, and caused Disney to lose billions). It was actually this very thing that caused Bob Chapek to get fired from Disney, and ultimately bring back Bob Iger.
Anyway, DeSantis did not like that Disney was using the full weight of their resources to strong-arm his administration, so he decided they were going to... "fix the glitch" to use an Office Space quote. DeSantis asked the legislation to pass a law that forced Disney under the new laws (laws as of the 1960s). Republicans have a super majority in the state, so it passed the house, senate, and he passed it.
This was horrendous for Disney, because they've essentially lost the power they once had. They now have to get everything approved through the new commission, which DeSantis directly appointed everyone on that board (and confirmed by the legislature). So Bob Iger (who was now back at the helm of Disney) was trying to stop this action since it was so catastrophic to Disney... but we see the result above.
I don't know if it would make a great movie... it's all pretty bland and I doubt if there's any yelling except for the board of directors to Bob Chapek after he had to face them. It might make for a low budget documentary.
The judge dismissed it without prejudice, which to those who don't know... it means it can be retried if so desired. Disney has decided to accept it though and move on.
Disney has gotten so much bad press, they just want it to all go away.
As I said... it's not a question of 1st amendment, it's a question of STATE constitutionality. A state's legislature can pass a law, and even if that's in retaliation to something you said or did... it's still law.
The judge dismissed it without prejudice, which to those who don't know... it means it can be retried if so desired. Disney has decided to accept it though and move on.
Once again the hooting and howling of our Leftist peanut gallery here is proven WRONG
This federal court decision also obviously renders Disney's parallel state level litigation moot.
Originally posted by randye: Once again the hooting and howling of our Leftist peanut gallery here is proven WRONG
This federal court decision also obviously renders Disney's parallel state level litigation moot.
I read as such also on another article (which I cannot find now). Something something, Disney will work with the new "government" in making Disney a magical place (or something to that effect).
But your comment about the state tort lawsuit is so right. Normally when there's competing Federal / State lawsuits, they let the state courts play out first... because then the Federal courts don't need to bother... and of course, it's part of the natural process of allowing cases to work their way through the court's "chain of command." But Disney asked the 11th Circuit to fast-track this court case intentionally. They believed if a decision was found in their favor, it would immediately bolster their state / tort case against DeSantis. But just as you said... even though this case was dismissed without prejudice, there's no win here. Matter of fact, they actually hurt their own case by referencing law that worked against their argument (which is insanely bad for that firm that supported them). It now means... as you've basically said, this state case will have no teeth. It'll probably see it's way through the courts, but it no longer means anything. Not for you, but for others... in tort law, guilt is different than in a criminal or constitutional-type of case. It becomes preponderance of evidence versus beyond reasonable doubt. So... I don't know what retribution Disney is seeking (damages I guess). Unless I'm totally wrong and it's not a tort case at all, but seeking to overturn the new commission. But either way... this state lawsuit has no teeth... and Disney will either let it play out, or just ask for the case to be dismissed. The state now has the evidence from the Federal case to support them.
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: That's one that went the Florida governor's way.
No disrespect, but I was confused at first when I started reading the article and realized this is about DeSantis, and nothing to do with Disney in the link. My intent at least with the post was focused more on Disney than it is on DeSantis. I view DeSantis's actions more as "the state" than I do him personally, but I understand why you'd come to that conclusion. From the prospect of Disney... the company has not been doing well... at all. Right or wrong, Disney's leadership under Bob Chapek was absolutely horrendous, and led to a lot of decisions that have caused Disney to lose billions. There's a reason why he was fired... and I hope that Bob Iger can again right the ship. Companies like Disney need to stay out of cultural politics. They can support different "communities" of people as they say... which, I hate that term because it's exclusionary, not inclusionary. But never the less... Disney is very much suffering from the "Go Woke, Go Broke" mindset. I live an hour from Disney, and go to Universal, but absolutely refuse to set foot in a Disney park until they get back to normal. I won't get Disney+, and refuse to go on their cruise ship (which I'd taken 3 Disney cruises in the past). I'm not alone...
Originally posted by randye: As if FOUR YEARS of relentless "Russian Collusion" bullshit wasn't enough... the Butch Lesbo, propagandist show, still mansplaining things for Leftist Lemmings.
So... have you got anything to say about these cases that went against your precious Ron Desantis?
Are you going to challenge the reporting? Is what's reported here factual or not? If the case against Disney that went in favor of the Florida governor is such a big deal, what about these other cases that have gone against him? Is there any balance to be struck? Any connection to be made? Or is it that you've become too delirious to say anything cogent because you're not getting enough oxygen?
You have not the wit to feel the embarrassment for yourself that is deservedly your lot.
Rachel Maddow had something to say about "Our Man Flynn"
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 02-01-2024).]
Disney has gotten so much bad press, they just want it to all go away.
Rams
they wish it would go way and the gays also
actually diz will fight on against the fascist nut rhonda
as the judge is a rump nut he only appoints scum to the courts one more reason to reject the fool
''During Winsor’s confirmation process, senators learned that the Floridian, who served as then-Gov. Rick Scott’s solicitor general, was a longtime member of the Federalist Society. The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights described Winsor as “a young, conservative ideologue who has attempted to restrict voting rights, LGBT equality, reproductive freedom, environmental protection, criminal defendants’ rights, and gun safety.
He does not possess the neutrality and fair-mindedness necessary to serve in a lifetime position as a federal judge.”
He was narrowly confirmed in 2019, over the objections of every Democratic senator except Joe Manchin.
Five years later, the conservative jurist is doing exactly what the political world expected him to do.
As for the future of the litigation, a Disney spokesperson told CNN, “This is an important case with serious implications for the rule of law, and it will not end here. If left unchallenged, this would set a dangerous precedent and give license to states to weaponize their official powers to punish the expression of political viewpoints they disagree with. We are determined to press forward with our case.”
rhonda won nothing just justice delayed a nut - con specialty seen before
I like the way this thread is shaping up. It's got possibilities. It's already drawn some interest from BingB or "Fred," as some like to call him. Forum member blackrams has appeared. I've got my fingers crossed, hoping to see Patrick, and maybe theBDub... ray b, olejoedad, williegoat... anyone and everyone I like to see.
This thread was named "Federal judge dismisses Disney's law suit...," but forum member randye has already enlarged the scope of this thread by putting on some display some of the mental decline that is part and parcel of the Trump cult and the MAGA "bottom feeders" that discredit the other and more intelligent members of the MAGA movement.
This is why I have selected this thread to offer an exceptional treat, for those who would have the wit to appreciate it.
Perhaps you've never seen any of a Lawrence O'Donnell segment. You may not even recognize the name. Or you may have already formed an opinion about him, or even rendered what you would call a "judgement" about him.
Say what you will, Lawrence O'Donnell's stupidest moment is smarter than any of the MAGA bottom feeders smartest moment, and this is among the best on-air segments he has ever produced. It's just about 6 minutes from start to finish.
quote
There is madness loose in the land, and no one fuels that madness more than Donald Trump.
In this on-air segment from last night (January 31), Lawrence O'Donnell examines how no one has ever exposed the depravity and the mindlessness of the Trump cult like the hugely celebrated music star Taylor Swift.
No one could call me a "Swiftie." I have nothing against Taylor Swift, but I'm not "into" her genre of pop music videos. I'm something of an NFL fan, and I have been following the postseason games, so I know about Taylor Swift's boyfriend, Travis Kelce. I've followed his exploits for many a year.
The choice is yours. You can waste another 6 minutes of your time here bloviating—if you've been even just mildly infected by the Trump Cult pathogen. Or you can enjoy some of the most carefully crafted and impeccably delivered TV commentary to be had. Even if you aren't going to agree with O'Donnell's assertions, you may want to see it just for the broadcasting artistry of his work. I think it's enormously funny, in Lawrence O'Donnell's signature understated style.
Originally posted by ray b:they wish it would go way and the gays also
actually diz will fight on against the fascist nut rhonda
as the judge is a rump nut he only appoints scum to the courts one more reason to reject the fool
''During Winsor’s confirmation process, senators learned that the Floridian, who served as then-Gov. Rick Scott’s solicitor general, was a longtime member of the Federalist Society. The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights described Winsor as “a young, conservative ideologue who has attempted to restrict voting rights, LGBT equality, reproductive freedom, environmental protection, criminal defendants’ rights, and gun safety.
He does not possess the neutrality and fair-mindedness necessary to serve in a lifetime position as a federal judge.”
He was narrowly confirmed in 2019, over the objections of every Democratic senator except Joe Manchin.
Five years later, the conservative jurist is doing exactly what the political world expected him to do.
As for the future of the litigation, a Disney spokesperson told CNN, “This is an important case with serious implications for the rule of law, and it will not end here. If left unchallenged, this would set a dangerous precedent and give license to states to weaponize their official powers to punish the expression of political viewpoints they disagree with. We are determined to press forward with our case.”
rhonda won nothing just justice delayed a nut - con specialty seen before
and I note every con here who posted got it wrong
I'm not sure what you think the case is asking for. The case was basically asking the Federal judge to allow Disney to do things that goes against the state constitution. Quite literally, they wanted to remain sovereign, which they have no authority to do. They existed for decades unconstitutionally simply because no one wanted to address it. They weren't even technically "grandfathered." But when the state legislature by a mass majority, and the state senate, by a mass majority, and then the governor, passed a law that forced all the special districts to conform to the laws set forth in the state constitution from the 1960s... that was a legal and constitutionally binding requirement. Regardless of what sparked it... it's constitutional. Disney is asking the state to allow them to do something that no company, anywhere, is allowed to do... and explicitly against the state constitution. No judge will allow Disney to do this.
In effect... no one is restricting Disney's free speech. They are allowed to say whatever they want. However, free speech does often come with a consequence... and it's important when you're the CEO of a major multi-national corporation, that you choose wisely what you say when you decide to get involved in politics.
View it. Don't view it. Carp about it. Suck your thumb.
It's all the same to me!
I think this is where I have to come to terms with being old... I keep hearing about Taylor Swift, but for the life of me, I don't think I know a single song she sings. I think there's one about a tiger or something, I don't know. I honestly have no clue. No one I know listens to her, and even my daughter, who's a teenager, has no interest in her. She hasn't expressed any disinterest towards her, it's just not the kind of music she listens to... (instead, things like Imagine Dragons, and the such). It's just amazing to me that a music star could become a billionaire, be so insanely popular, and yet I've never been exposed to anything she's done except for a few things here and there. The only thing I know about her is that I guess she sold her music or something, or someone stole them... George Soros? Is that right? LOL... I guess I wasn't wrong... that's wild. What is George Soros doing with Taylor Swift music... https://www.heyalma.com/why...family-on-instagram/
Anyway, I know next to nothing about her.
Ask what's going on with Axl Rose, or Motley Crue though... and I can tell you everything you need to know.
Joe Manchin is the most reasonable Democrat in the Senate. He has a mind, and uses it for the betterment of his constituency. That is the sole job of a Senator.
rayb, you are plagiarizing, again. Have you no shame, stealing the words of another and presenting them as your own. That's so....bidenesque......
Are you going to challenge the reporting? Is what's reported here factual or not? If the case against Disney that went in favor of the Florida governor is such a big deal, what about these other cases that have gone against him? Is there any balance to be struck? Any connection to be made? Or is it that you've become too delirious to say anything cogent because you're not getting enough oxygen?
You have not the wit to feel the embarrassment for yourself that is deservedly your lot.
Rachel Maddow had something to say about "Our Man Flynn"
Maybe I'm reading into this but, it appears Randye hit a nerve..............
Joe Manchin is the most reasonable Democrat in the Senate. He has a mind, and uses it for the betterment of his constituency. That is the sole job of a Senator.
rayb, you are plagiarizing, again. Have you no shame, stealing the words of another and presenting them as your own. That's so....bidenesque......
This is why I have selected this thread to offer an exceptional treat, for those who would have the wit to appreciate it.
SNIP
View it. Don't view it. Carp about it. Suck your thumb.
It's all the same to me!
First, I don't care about Travis Kelcie and his girlfriend's relationship but, I am a KC Chiefs fan. It's their busines, not mine. I view your post simply as a distraction to the thread so, since I don't suck my thumb, I'll just ignore the distraction.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-01-2024).]
Originally posted by blackrams: First, I don't care about Travis Kelcie and his girlfriend but, I am a KC Chiefs fan. I view your post simply as a distraction to the thread so, since I don't suck my thumb, I'll just ignore the distraction.
The video segment has way more in it than just Travis Kelce and Taylor Swift.
It's your choice.
Don't expose yourself to anything that might surprise you or show you something you haven't thought about.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 02-01-2024).]
Joe Manchin is the most reasonable Democrat in the Senate. He has a mind, and uses it for the betterment of his constituency. That is the sole job of a Senator.
rayb, you are plagiarizing, again. Have you no shame, stealing the words of another and presenting them as your own. That's so....bidenesque......
Agree with the Senator Manchin statement, I do hope he joins the No Labels Party and runs against Biden. I have no doubt he'll steal votes from quite a few Dems and a few Republicans. Almost anyone would be better than the Oval Office holder we currently have. Reference rayb plagiarizing, have no clue, I read very few of rayb's postings since the vast majority don't make sense anyway.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-01-2024).]
It isn't reporting from Rachel Maddow. It's reporting from someone named Steve Benen, on the Rachel Maddow blog.
I don't look for any intelligence from randye, but everyone else who just glosses over his nonsense, without ever once remarking it for the "eye trash" that it is, is looking kind of feckless —as usual.
What else are we here for?
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 02-01-2024).]
Ask what's going on with Axl Rose, or Motley Crue though... and I can tell you everything you need to know.
Who?
Adam Neely had an interesting video about how and when one's musical tastes are formed. I posted it here a while back, but I can't find it. Neely is uber woke, but very knowledgeable.
Joe Manchin is the most reasonable Democrat in the Senate. He has a mind, and uses it for the betterment of his constituency. That is the sole job of a Senator.
rayb, you are plagiarizing, again. Have you no shame, stealing the words of another and presenting them as your own. That's so....bidenesque......
THAT JOE IS CUCK RINO/DINO CAN'T DECIDE WHAT HE IS HIMSELF AKA A FRAUD TWO FACED LACKY SENATOR
IN THE MODERN ERA THE ABILITY TO FIND A SOURCE OF A QUOTE IS SO EAZY EVEN A CHRISTIAN CAN DO IT THERE IS NO STEAL JUST FOOLS WHO WANT EVERYTHING THEIR WAY ONLY
The image that I appended to my remarks, and the caption...
Rachel Maddow had something to say about "Our Man Flynn"
I call that "eye candy." It's just to garnish that remark with a small quantum of piquancy.
It's a mistake to think that my previous remarks were particularly about Rachel Maddow. I remark the emptiness and banality of that other forum member's childish memes and slogans. It's not about Rachel Maddow.
What's conspicuous is that the "randye" didn't say anything about these other cases that went against Ron Desantis. Nor has anyone else... not even blackrams. https://www.msnbc.com/rache...ack-court-rcna133494
That isn't reporting from Rachel Maddow. It's reporting from someone named Steve Benen, on the Rachel Maddow blog.
Just for the record, I often start a sentence in this way: "Forum member blackrams..." There's a particular reason, and it's not the pursuit of formalism. It's to resolve a quandary. What if I were to start the sentence with "blackrams"..? It looks odd, to start a sentence without capitalizing the first letter of the first word. I could start with "Blackrams," but that is altering his screen name by capitalizing the "b" that it begins with. So I often start with "Forum member blackrams" or whoever.
I also like to italicize a forum member's screen name, if it isn't obvious within the context that it's a screen name. So that is why I often put a blackrams or an olejoedad—but not a Patrick. I wouldn't want someone stumbling over my sentence and thinking to themselves, "What's a blackrams?"
Just for the record.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 02-01-2024).]
Just for the record, I often start a sentence in this way: "Forum member blackrams..." There's a particular reason, and it's not the pursuit of formalism. It's to resolve a quandary. What if I were to start the sentence with "blackrams"..? It looks odd, to start a sentence without capitalizing the first letter of the first word. I could start with "Blackrams," but that is altering his screen name by capitalizing the "b" that it begins with. So I often start with "Forum member blackrams" or whoever.
I also like to italicize a forum member's screen name, if it isn't obvious within the context that it's a screen name. So that is why I often put a blackrams or an olejoedad—but not a Patrick. I wouldn't want someone stumbling over my sentence and thinking to themselves, "What's a blackrams?"
Just for the record.
Well, now that you've got that off your chest, hope you feel better. Doesn't matter to me, I'm a little fish in a very big pond.
Originally posted by blackrams: First, I don't care about Travis Kelcie and his girlfriend's relationship but, I am a KC Chiefs fan. It's their busines, not mine. I view your post simply as a distraction to the thread so, since I don't suck my thumb, I'll just ignore the distraction.
I've posted countless links to articles and video segments, but I have gone far out of my way to delineate what makes this fairly brief video presentation special... about as far out of my way as the orbit of Neptune.
Back on the Disney topic... it's important to understand and read exactly what the judge said in his decision:
"Winsor said that "Disney cannot validly argue that the court can go beyond the laws’ text because the statute is facially constitutional. The secondary problem is that the laws’ effects are not limited to Disney. The laws are directed at a special development district in which Disney operates,” he said. Disney is not the district’s only landowner, and other landowners within the district are affected by the same laws.
Point blank... the laws that are affecting Disney are constitutional, and while DeSantis obviously initiated it as punishment for Disney, he did so in a way that the law was intentionally written to "correct a wrong" that existed in the management of these special districts that existed prior to the passage of the Florida Constitution. This law went through the normal legislative process, and is not only Constitutional, but ensures that these companies are now actually abiding by the state's Constitution (which they were not previously).
This was the clear argument that I'd made on here when we began discussing it over a year ago... and I am not shocked that the judge came to the same conclusion. The judge's responsibility isn't to enact social justice. The purpose of these judges first and foremost is to support the state... that being the Federal government, or the state government. More specifically said, their goal is to TRY to find a way to defend the laws presented to them as constitutional... and NOT to strike them down. This is very opposite from most people's understanding of the court. Their job is to identify if they can uphold the constitutionality of a law... and only if they cannot, do they strike it down.
Maybe that's not how you'd want it in Rayb-landia, but in the United States... that's the purpose of the court... not to enact social change.
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 02-02-2024).]
the pig judges the rump inflicted on our courts are a curse
de-satan will be gone soon
he should have respected the resign to run law but cheated and had a good law removed he is a mini rump and that is all he will ever be sad that the evil RWNJ ever got in office it takes a real creep to make the mouse look good
now he want to invade texas steers and queers beware
Once again, the hooting and howling of our Leftist peanut gallery here is proven WRONG
This federal court decision also obviously renders Disney's parallel state level litigation moot.
Whenever I encounter a MAGA-infected patient (or potential patient) braying like a lobotomized jackass over some supposed victory for the MAGA cause, I ask myself "Is that the whole story?" In this case, there's a fat lady waiting patiently offstage for her chance to sing. Here's a new development:
"Disney appeals dismissal of free speech lawsuit as DeSantis says company should ‘move on’"
quote
Disney filed a notice of appeal over Wednesday’s ruling by a federal judge in Tallahassee, saying that it would set a dangerous precedent if left unchallenged by giving states the green light to weaponize their powers to punish opposing viewpoints. A separate lawsuit over who controls the district also is still pending in state court in Orlando.
Disney had argued that legislation signed by DeSantis and passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature transferring control of the Disney World governing district from Disney supporters to DeSantis appointees was in retaliation for the company publicly opposing the state’s “Don’t Say Gay” law. The 2022 law banned classroom lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades and was championed by DeSantis, who had used Disney as a punching bag in speeches on the campaign trail until he recently suspended his campaign for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination.
At the very least, this legal case involving Florida Governor Ron Desantis has not yet been salted away as a "1" in the governor's Win column, and it's still a risk for anyone to be braying about it like a lobotomized jackass... the risk of premature celebration. Perhaps you've seen some of the video highlights over the years, where a football player with the pigskin in his grasp breaks into celebration as he's about to cross over the goal line to score a touchdown, and fumbles the ball on the 1-yard line. The risks of premature celebration...
Much has been made of Rachel Maddow in this thread, with the childish "Lesbo" memes and the silly slogans about "Leftists." I guess that's because the first reporting that I highlighted, hoping to bring it to the forum's attention, is from Steve Benen, who among his other curriculum vitae, is a producer for The Rachel Maddow Show, and the editor of MaddowBlog. Here's a look at that:
quote
As if his faltering Republican presidential campaign weren't a big enough problem, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis keeps losing court fights, too.
quote
Dealing a blow to [Governor] Ron Desantis of Florida, a federal court of appeals on Wednesday ruled that he had violated First Amendment protections when he suspended a progressive state prosecutor for political gain. The ruling, by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, undercut Mr. Desantis on an episode he has made a key credential in his presidential campaign.
quote
The matter is now headed back to a lower court, but in the meantime, it’s worth pausing to appreciate just how frequently the GOP governor’s culture war efforts have struggled in the courts. Last summer, for example, DeSantis’ policies against drag shows and trans care have suffered legal setbacks, which were part of a lengthy pattern.
DeSantis also lost when a court blocked Florida’s “Stop WOKE Act”; his anti-protest measure was also blocked by a federal judge; the Republican’s law to regulate social media companies was blocked by a different federal judge; and the cases brought by his elections police unit have largely fallen short.
This is a brief article. It has links embedded within it, that any bona fide Ron Desantis enthusiast could use to access more reporting on these cases.
PBS has a recent article about the case of the Florida prosecutor that Governor Desantis had suspended from his office as prosecutor:
"Court sends case of prosecutor suspended by DeSantis back to trial judge over 1st Amendment issues" Curt Anderson for the Associated Press; January 10, 2024. https://www.pbs.org/newshou...1st-amendment-issues
Here's another one that was published at the end of last year:
"Judge says DeSantis spread false information while pushing trans health care restrictions" Brendan Farrington for the Associated Press; December 21, 2023. https://www.pbs.org/newshou...th-care-restrictions
Does anyone else have any braying, lobotomized jackass stories that they'd like to share?
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 02-02-2024).]
the pig judges the rump inflicted on our courts are a curse
de-satan will be gone soon
he should have respected the resign to run law but cheated and had a good law removed he is a mini rump and that is all he will ever be sad that the evil RWNJ ever got in office it takes a real creep to make the mouse look good
now he want to invade texas steers and queers beware
Ok, let me use an example. Remember when the conservative court ruled in favor of the Obama Administration in the lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act? The court sided with the President's lawyers and upheld the law as constitutional. Even though I was very unhappy about it at the time, I accepted the fact that if they said it was constitutional, then it was.
Consider then Disney... who had been operating for over 50 years in a way that was counter to the laws on the state's Constitution. I don't think this is being question, right? I'm assuming you know this?
While DeSantis may have initiated this as some form of retribution to Disney, the fact is... he had the right. He went through the right process to pass a law that mandated not just Disney, but the 11 other "special districts" (whom had existed prior to the ratification of the state's constitution) abide by the existing law that all the other post 1960s special districts had to abide by. Intent aside... the law was totally Constitutional, and Disney's lawsuit never had any teeth here.
Again, I can't remember what the state's court case is... it might be a tort... and if that's the case, there could actually be a judgement against the state for damages. But it's looking increasingly unlikely since this Federal case now becomes leverage in support of the tortfeasor.
At the very least, this legal case involving Florida Governor Ron Desantis has not yet been salted away as a "1" in the governor's Win column, and it's still a risk for anyone to be braying about it like a lobotomized jackass... the risk of premature celebration. Perhaps you've seen some of the video highlights over the years, where a football player with the pigskin in his grasp breaks into celebration as he's about to cross over the goal line to score a touchdown, and fumbles the ball on the 1-yard line. The risks of premature celebration...
This is wild… what do you think the point here is? Disney has to know that they can’t win this… there’s no scenario where Disney can win. Whether they’re targeted or not, there’s no right for Disney to continue to exist in a manner that’s unconstitutional to the state. In the original lawsuit, it’s to get rid of the commission that DeSantis appointed (as part of the “ask”), but these commissioners were confirmed by the state’s legislature… so thus, constitutional (and DeSantis has the authority to appoint for new districts per the state’s constitution).
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: This is wild… what do you think the point here is? Disney has to know that they can’t win this… there’s no scenario where Disney can win. Whether they’re targeted or not, there’s no right for Disney to continue to exist in a manner that’s unconstitutional to the state. In the original lawsuit, it’s to get rid of the commission that DeSantis appointed (as part of the “ask”), but these commissioners were confirmed by the state’s legislature… so thus, constitutional (and DeSantis has the authority to appoint for new districts per the state’s constitution).
rhonda the pig got a rump appointed pig judge to rule NO STANDING on diz
any lawdog knows the money ''wins'' in the end every time now who has more money rhonda or diz ?
once they get to a real court with a real non rump pig judge rhonda the want-to-be-nazi will lose on the law
where do the Gop get these pig people like rhonda ?
