DeSantis and Disney

A Florida man fights a mouse. The Florida man should lose.

Getty Images

Background

A little over a year ago, Ron DeSantis and the Florida State Legislature were making national headlines, winning the hearts of cultural conservatives everywhere, as they were passing House Bill 1557. Officially named the Parental Rights in Education Act but derisively called the “Don’t Say Gay” bill by its opponents, the legislation restricted the discussion of sexuality and gender identity with students from kindergarten to third grade.

The whole ordeal couldn’t have gone better for DeSantis, as the bill was generally pretty popular among the Right’s staunchest supporters while garnering majority support from independents as well. At the same time, it made all the right people angry, as many on the Left lost their minds. It had the makings of another victory for the Republican governor whose stock was already sky-high due to his performance during the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, as the bill was being passed, Disney’s then-CEO Bob Chapek, was under immense pressure from activists, employees, and even Walt Disney’s granddaughter to break his silence and fight back against the bill. In a company-wide memo, Chapek apologized for his silence and then reached out to DeSantis in a last-second attempt to convince DeSantis to veto the bill. DeSantis responded as one would expect- he signed the bill and vowed to never “back down to woke corporations.”

DeSantis could have ended it there and notched a massive victory in his belt, but he wasn’t satisfied yet. DeSantis, as stealthily as possible, wanted to hit Disney where it hurt. He worked with the Florida Legislature and soon passed a bill that got rid of Disney’s special district- the Reedy Creek Improvement District.

After worries that this would transfer Disney’s debt onto local taxpayers, Florida Republicans released a plan to keep the district intact but rename it the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District. Also, the district’s leadership board was stacked with DeSantis allies instead of the previous group dominated by Disney allies.

Whether DeSantis thought Disney would have no choice but to accept this or that it would get shot down in court, it is almost certainly true that DeSantis did not expect what happened next. Before the new board came in, the Disney-dominated board quietly, though legally and with proper public notice, transferred most of the board’s power to Disney. They also signed a new development agreement that gave Disney the ability to build freely on its property for the next 30 years and the ability to veto board-driven changes to the district. According to new board member Ron Per, “This board loses, for practical purposes, the majority of its ability to do anything beyond maintain the roads and maintain basic infrastructure.”

This agreement was done weeks in advance of the transfer of power, but it was not discovered until after the board took over. In other words, Disney outsmarted the administration and got the better of them.

In response, the new DeSantis-picked board this Wednesday said the deal signed by the old Disney-dominated board was improperly implemented and thus void. Minutes later, Disney sued Ron DeSantis. In the suit, Disney is alleging that the government is violating the First Amendment by unconstitutionally targeting the company due to its political speech and violating the Contract Clause of the U.S. Constitution by passing a law that impairs the contract signed by the company and the old board.

If DeSantis thought this battle with Disney was going to be quick, then this lawsuit makes it clear that he was badly mistaken. With Bob Chapek gone as CEO and the longtime CEO Bob Iger at the helm, Disney is making it abundantly clear that it is not scared of a fight with the DeSantis administration.

Disney is Right

One of the downsides of taking a principled position, especially in legal issues, is that sometimes it requires you to defend people that you don’t like. For example, the Supreme Court decided the famous case, National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie in 1977, in which it protected the right of the Nazi party to march in a predominately Jewish suburb of Chicago, not because it supported the speech of the Nazi Party, but because it supported the right to free speech regardless of the entity involved.

That’s how I feel about defending Disney. I do not like the company and have not liked them for years. I think they insert terrible messaging into their movies with the goal of influencing the way children think about what is right and wrong. I also think they promote an unhealthy escapist mentality and the false notion that a utopia can be created.

In spite of my dislike of the company, I am fully on the side of Disney in this legal battle.

“But, companies don’t have a constitutional right to tax breaks.” This is the immediate response from defenders of DeSantis, and they are absolutely correct. In fact, I am almost always against tax breaks in general for specific companies or industries, as I dislike the government picking winners and losers in the economy.

(Without getting too sidetracked, minimizing the special district for Disney to just “tax breaks” is a little misleading to being with. While the company may get tax breaks (I’m not actually sure whether they do or not), the special district localizes control in a way that makes sense for a company that basically has created its own city. For example, Disney can provide its own emergency services or build Cinderella’s castle without dealing with a local government.)

However, the issue in the case isn’t the specific policy of tax breaks or special treatment. The issue is whether the government has the right to take away tax breaks or special treatment in response to an entity’s political speech. The answer to this is clearly no.

Put another way, the government doesn’t have to give or maintain tax breaks or special privileges for a company, but, once the government chooses to, it can’t take them away in response to a company’s political speech, religious affiliation, or other things protected by the First Amendment. This a vitally important constitutional protection to maintain.

In fact, a perfect example demonstrating why happened just a few years ago. In 2019, the City of San Antonio City Council voted to ban Chick-fil-a from opening a store in the San Antonio Airport due to the fast-food chain’s donations to “anti-LGBT” causes and views supportive of traditional marriage. Chick-fil-a was never entitled to a spot in the San Antonio Airport, but the city couldn’t discriminate against Chick-fil-a in the process either.

Corporations, such as Chick-fil-a and Disney, can be as actively involved in politics as they want- including spending endless amounts of money lobbying politicians- without fearing retribution from the government. Protecting this viewpoint-neutral principle, even in the case of a company like Disney that has values antithetical to a conservative, Christian worldview, ensures the protection of a Christian, conservative company to promote its beliefs.

This whole ordeal is an example of some of my discomfort with supporting DeSantis in the 2024 Republican primary. On the one hand, he is an infinitely better option than Trump and I will gladly vote for DeSantis if it means Trump does not become the nominee. On the other hand, I can’t stand politicians that try to use the power of government to punish those they disagree with. I am interested in limiting the power of government, not fight over who gets to use the power of government against others.

Is DeSantis so thin-skinned that he can’t handle a corporation disagreeing with him? Or, is he so vindictive that he must get revenge on a corporation that disagrees with him?

I know the Democratic Party is much more comfortable using governmental power to achieve its goals, but that is exactly why I don’t support the Democratic Party. Refusing to respond the same way isn’t a demonstration of weakness; rather, it is standing strong on principle. DeSantis, along with the new crop of Republican politicians that aren’t afraid of using governmental power, should remember that government power is a two-edged sword.

The best way to ensure the power of government isn’t used against conservatives is to limit its ability to be used against everybody. That is why I am supporting Disney in its fight against DeSantis.

God Bless,

Hunter Burnett