• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Florida Lt Governor says the quiet part out loud.

Gateman_Wen

Official disruptive influence
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
22,825
Reaction score
25,556
Location
Middle of it all
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
If disney goes back to the republican agenda they will get their status back. Video at the link.

 
@Gateman_Wen is correct. Listen to him.
This very much IS "GOVERNMENT PUNISHMENT for expressing an opinion" and furthermore, this was never some "organized woke left mob" either. It was Disney employees.
Yes Virginia, Disney employs many gay and lesbian people -----

SHOCKER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Time for Disney to take this to court.....but I doubt they will. At first, I thought that Orange County would have no standing in such a case but...if they could prove this was a violation of the 1st A which results in harm to them......maybe? Thoughts?
 
"Who wants to remind the Florida GOP that Citizens Untied was brought by Republicans, and made law by a GOP-majority Supreme Court to give corporations more of a voice in politics by using their wealth to do so?"
 

Perhaps a better case could be made for calling this (punish Disney?) legislation a bill of attainder (or pains and penalties).

The clause thus prohibits all legislative acts, “no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial. . . .”

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-9/clause-3/bills-of-attainder
 
I didn't hear her say they'd get their privileges back if they changed their stance, but she did make it clear why they passed the law.

To me this seems like an abuse of power by the governor. Imagine what he'll do as President.
 
"Who wants to remind the Florida GOP that Citizens Untied was brought by Republicans, and made law by a GOP-majority Supreme Court to give corporations more of a voice in politics by using their wealth to do so?"

CU limited the power of the FEC to ban private political speech (funded by anonymous donors?) too close to federal election time - not even close to what is happening with the punish Disney bill. See post #10.
 
I didn't hear her say they'd get their privileges back if they changed their stance, but she did make it clear why they passed the law.

To me this seems like an abuse of power by the governor. Imagine what he'll do as President.

Throwing this legislative act in the lap of the governor ignores reality. IMHO, this is clearly unconstitutional as being a bill of attainder (extra-judicial punishment), but I’m not sure whether or not that part of US Constitution the applies to state laws.

Article I, Section 9, Clause 3:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

 
I hope that Disdney or the Counties take his sorry ass to court....the Counties might but I don't think Disney will.
 
A fun opinion piece from TechDirt gives us more examples of Florida GOPers saying exactly the opposite of what they claim in other cases.


So, the TechDirt guy thought the special provisions for Disney World should have never been issued in the first place - but . . .
 
I didn't hear her say they'd get their privileges back if they changed their stance, but she did make it clear why they passed the law.

To me this seems like an abuse of power by the governor. Imagine what he'll do as President.
DeSantis did as well. The Newsmax anchor made the point about Disney reverting to it's previous values and this all going away which Lt. Gov Nuñez seems to agree with. What's interesting is that the same folks who want parents to have more control over what their children are exposed to now advocate the government act in this regard versus just having parents decide what their kids watch.
 
Throwing this legislative act in the lap of the governor ignores reality.
I read it was DeSantis's idea.

IMHO, this is clearly unconstitutional as being a bill of attainder (extra-judicial punishment), but I’m not sure whether or not that part of US Constitution the applies to state laws.



attached to this issue. Every state constitution also expressly forbids bills of attainder.[3][4] The U.S. Supreme Court has invalidated laws under the Attainder Clause on five occasions.[5]
 

Watching Disney‘s content does not depend on Disney running (or being) a local government.
 
OK, but the law must be challenged regardless of who agrees with it or why.
I took your earlier post to mean we couldn't blame this on the governor. Yes, I think we can.
 
I took your earlier post to mean we couldn't blame this on the governor. Yes, I think we can.

I was simply basing my disagreement on the premise of the extremely narrowly targeted law - whether it is or is not supported by a particular politician doesn’t matter to me.

Other laws, like the proposed federal income tax (penalty?) on annual unrealized capital gains (which are not income at all) for folks with $100M (or more) in net worth are, IMHO, also unconstitutionally targeted laws specifically intended to punish a well defined minority of the population.
 
Watching Disney‘s content does not depend on Disney running (or being) a local government.
Nope, and one can certainly argue that these kind of arrangements should be addressed as a whole when struck with corporations as an incentive to come to a particular state. The thing is this was just making that process conditional on partisan/ideological grounds versus one of finance and process.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…