Hubbry Logo
Disney v. DeSantisDisney v. DeSantisMain
Open search
Disney v. DeSantis
Community hub
Disney v. DeSantis
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Disney v. DeSantis
Disney v. DeSantis
Disney v. DeSantis
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Disney v. DeSantis
CourtUnited States District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Full case name Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. v. Ronald D. DeSantis, Meredith Ivey, Martin Garcia, Michael Sasso, Brian Aungst, Jr., Ron Peri, Bridget Ziegler, and John Classe
DecidedJanuary 31, 2024
Docket nos.4:23-cv-00163
Court membership
Judge sittingAllen C. Winsor[1][2]

Disney v. DeSantis was a lawsuit brought against Florida governor Ron DeSantis by the Parks, Experiences and Products division of The Walt Disney Company in 2023 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. The plaintiff claims that DeSantis, with Florida Department of Economic Opportunity acting secretary Meredith Ivey and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board, violated the company's First Amendment rights by using government power to exact political retaliation.

The dispute began when Disney officials, under pressure from customers and employees, expressed disapproval for the proposed Florida Parental Rights in Education Act, which had been labeled by reporters, protesters, and counter-protesters as the "Don't Say Gay" bill. After DeSantis responded angrily to Disney's disapproval, the Florida State Legislature repealed the Reedy Creek Improvement Act that had established a special governance and taxing district around Walt Disney World.

Critics of Disney argued that the district should have been reformed long before as it gave the company too much self-governing power. Critics of DeSantis argue that he made Florida's government harmful to doing business with gay people, undermined a business's right to free speech, and is hurting one of the state's largest employers and taxpayers. Among his critics were other Republican leaders, including then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and then-fellow presidential candidates Donald Trump and Nikki Haley.

A federal judge ruled in favor of DeSantis on January 31, 2024. A spokesperson for Disney said the company was undeterred by the ruling and intended to press forward with their case. The next day, Disney filed an appeal to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.[3][4] On March 27, 2024, Disney settled its pending state court lawsuits with DeSantis. Per the agreement, Disney put the appeal of their federal lawsuit on hold while negotiations regarding a new development agreement play out.[5][6][7] The settlement came a day after DeSantis replaced two Disney critics on the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District with Disney supporters[8][9] and two weeks after The Parental Rights in Education Act was largely overturned by a court.[10][11]

Background

[edit]

Walt Disney World and the Reedy Creek Improvement District

[edit]
Main article: Reedy Creek Improvement District
Walt Disney World was opened in Florida in 1971 and is governed by the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

In October 1971, the entertainment resort complex Walt Disney World was opened in Bay Lake, Florida.[12] Walt Disney World is governed by the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, formerly the Reedy Creek Improvement District, which includes part of Orange and Osceola County. Reedy Creek was created in 1967 by the Reedy Creek Improvement Act, signed by then-Florida governor Claude R. Kirk Jr. (R), with the purpose being for Walt Disney to build a community (i.e. a town, to be known as EPCOT), with an emphasis on the zoning issues brothers Walt and Roy Disney faced when Disneyland opened in 1955.[13]

Ron DeSantis

[edit]
Further information: Disney and Florida's Parental Rights in Education Act

In January 2019, Ron DeSantis was elected governor of Florida.[14] DeSantis signed the Florida Parental Rights in Education Act in March 2022, prohibiting public schools in Florida from discussing or having classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity from kindergarten through third grade.[15] Before its passage, the act spurred a political debate within The Walt Disney Company, whose then-CEO, Bob Chapek, stated that he would not take a stance against or for the bill.[16] Although Chapek later apologized for his comments and paused political donations in the State while promising to do more, including using all company resources to force Florida to repeal the bill,[17] a group of employees organized a series of walkouts at The Walt Disney Company headquarters in Burbank, California.[18] As Disney heir Charlee Corra came out as transgender and condemned the law,[19] conservative activists and pundits began protesting Disney, with activist Christopher Rufo claiming that conservatives are "waging [a] moral war against Disney". The release of a video of Disney Television Animation producer Latoya Raveneau discussing Disney's willingness to incorporate queer storytelling further intensified the feud; DeSantis voiced his support for repealing the act that created the Reedy Creek Improvement District.[20]

On April 22, 2022, DeSantis signed a bill repealing the Reedy Creek Improvement District.[21] Rather than seeking to dissolve Reedy Creek, DeSantis eyed seizing it, reserving that taxpayers would not be responsible for its debt, estimated to be US$1 billion, or Walt Disney World's community services.[22][23] DeSantis gained control of the district on February 27, 2023.[24]

However, before the Florida House of Representatives voted on transferring control of the district to DeSantis, the soon to be ousted Reedy Creek board members voted to give Disney functional control over the district for the foreseeable future, making the DeSantis-backed board powerless. The way the board's action was written received significant media attention. Because of rules against granting control in perpetuity, the agreement used a royal lives clause invoking King Charles III's last descendant:[25]

This Declaration shall continue in effect until twenty one (21) years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this Declaration.

Lawsuit

[edit]

On April 26, 2023, at the first meeting of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board, the members voted to nullify Reedy Creek's transfer of control of the district to Disney.[26]

Within minutes of the meeting, Disney v. DeSantis was filed in federal court. In the case, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts sued DeSantis, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity acting secretary Meredith Ivey, and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board, accusing them of violating the company's First Amendment rights by utilizing political power for "government retaliation" purposes.[27] The lawsuit states that DeSantis' actions "jeopardizes its economic future in the region, and violates its constitutional rights" and highlighted its value to the state of Florida; Disney is one of the largest employers in the state, provided US$1.1 billion in state and local taxes,[28] and helps drive tourism.[29] The lawsuit was filed by Daniel Petrocelli on Disney's behalf, a lawyer based in Los Angeles whose services were requested by former president Donald Trump in a 2016 class action lawsuit against the now-defunct Trump University.

The case was assigned to United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida chief judge Mark E. Walker, appointed by former president Barack Obama, who handed a victory to six University of Florida professors in a First Amendment case in 2022.[30] U.S. magistrate judge Martin Fitzpatrick recused himself from the case due to a conflict of interest.[31]

On May 1, 2023, the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board voted to countersue Disney.[32]

On June 1, 2023, Chief Judge Walker ruled against a motion by DeSantis to disqualify him due to previous comments in unrelated cases. However, Walker recused himself on the same day, after learning that a relative owned stock in Disney.[1][2] The case was reassigned to Judge Allen C. Winsor, appointed by former president Donald Trump, who previously dismissed a case against the state involving the Florida Parental Rights in Education Act that is in the middle of the Disney v. DeSantis lawsuit. Judge Winsor was also previously the Solicitor General of Florida.[33]

On June 26, 2023, attorneys for DeSantis filed a motion to dismiss Disney's lawsuit claiming that the Governor and Florida legislators have "legislative immunity."[34] The lawsuit was dismissed on January 31, 2024.[35] The next day, Disney filed an appeal to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.[3][4]

On March 27, 2024, Disney and DeSantis reached a settlement in state court, in which Disney agreed to suspend its appeal, while it negotiated a new development agreement with the state.[5] While the settlement cleared the way for the DeSantis-backed Central Florida Tourism Oversight District to exert more control over Disney's operations, it came only after DeSantis replaced the two most vocal Disney critics on the board with Disney supporters.[8][9] It also came two weeks after The Parental Rights in Education Act was largely overturned by a court.[10][11]

Impact

[edit]

Disney v. DeSantis was seen as a flashpoint in the 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries, in which DeSantis was running. Fellow candidates criticized DeSantis for his antagonism towards Disney.[36] Political analysts said the feud cost DeSantis the support of "Soccer Moms in Iowa" and conservative business leaders who disliked seeing a politician use the power of government to punish a company.[8]

Martin Garcia, the chair of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board, said that the district would have to raise taxes in order to pay for legal fees.[27]

Responses and commentary

[edit]

DeSantis's response

[edit]

Disney v. DeSantis was filed during DeSantis' overseas trade tour and foreign visit to Israel, in which he spoke at The Jerusalem Post's "Celebrate the Faces of Israel" event. At a news conference at the Museum of Tolerance Jerusalem, DeSantis said the lawsuit was without merit.[37]

Republican response

[edit]

Former president Donald Trump said that DeSantis "is being absolutely destroyed by Disney." Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy referenced a social media bill signed into law by DeSantis in 2021, wherein Disney was able to provide an exemption for themselves.[38] Other critical Republicans include former New Jersey governor Chris Christie, New Hampshire governor Chris Sununu, and former Arkansas governor Asa Hutchinson. Presidential candidate Nikki Haley said that Disney should move to the "anti-woke" South Carolina, while Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy urged DeSantis and Disney to negotiate.[39]

Analysis

[edit]

Floyd Abrams, who represented The New York Times in New York Times Co. v. United States, said that the lawsuit would survive a motion to dismiss and that it was a "serious First Amendment case". Legal scholar Rebecca Tushnet concurred. Law professor RonNell Andersen Jones noted that Disney has been afforded considerable First Amendment protections due to conservative justices on the Supreme Court, contrasting previous stances with current rhetoric from conservatives.[40] Lawyer and columnist for The New York Times David French invoked O'Hare Truck Service, Inc. v. City of Northlake and said that, should Disney lose the case, the courts would "cast a pall of fear over private expression".[41]

After the settlement was reached, DeSantis claimed it was a total victory for him. Legal analysts however said that to achieve that victory, DeSantis had given Disney everything they wanted.[8]

Online response

[edit]

The lawsuit divided fans of Disney, with moderators for a Walt Disney World subreddit removing dozens of comments. Tom Bricker, who operates Disney Tourist Blog, said he attempted to keep the comments on his blog neutral while continuing to write blog posts.[42]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Disney v. DeSantis

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Disney v. DeSantis encompasses a series of legal battles and political maneuvers between and Governor , stemming from Disney's vocal opposition to 's Parental Rights in Education Act in March 2022. The Act, signed into law by DeSantis, prohibits classroom instruction on or in through , with provisions extending restrictions in higher grades unless age-appropriate. Disney's public stance against the legislation, including internal pledges to seek its repeal amid employee activism, prompted retaliatory state actions targeting the Reedy Creek Improvement District—a special taxing district established in 1967 granting Disney quasi-governmental autonomy over its property, including infrastructure, zoning, and debt issuance without typical voter oversight. In response, the repealed Reedy Creek's charter in April 2022 as part of a broader but primarily Disney-focused bill dissolving independent special districts lacking recent voter approval, replacing it with the state-controlled . signed enabling legislation in February 2023, appointing a five-member board to oversee the district and eliminating Disney's exemptions from state growth management laws and certain taxes, framing the move as terminating an unaccountable "corporate kingdom" rather than mere punishment for speech. Disney countered by filing a federal lawsuit in April 2023 against and state officials, alleging First Amendment viewpoint discrimination through targeted revocation of its self-governing powers. The federal case was dismissed in January 2024 by U.S. District Judge , who ruled Disney lacked standing to sue the governor personally and that the legislative actions were lawful exercises of state . Parallel state challenges by contested the new board's and prior agreements securing development rights, but these culminated in a March 2024 settlement wherein withdrew remaining suits, the oversight board approved comprehensive development plans restoring much of 's operational control, and the federal appeal was paused indefinitely. The dispute highlighted tensions between corporate political engagement and state sovereignty over , with 's special status effectively preserved through negotiation despite formal governance shifts, underscoring the practical limits of punitive reforms against entrenched economic interests.

Historical and Political Background

Origins of the Reedy Creek Improvement District

In the mid-1960s, Walt Disney Productions sought a large tract of undeveloped land in Central Florida for a second major theme park and resort complex, following the success of Disneyland in California. To avoid driving up land prices through speculation, the company conducted purchases through anonymous shell entities such as "Florida Ranch Lands" and "Bay Lake Properties," acquiring over 27,000 acres between 1964 and 1965 in Orange and Osceola Counties, primarily consisting of swampland, pine forests, and citrus groves. On October 25, 1965, Walt Disney publicly announced the project, dubbed "Disney World," which required extensive infrastructure development including roads, utilities, drainage, and fire services across the vast, unincorporated area, beyond the capacity of local counties burdened by rapid post-World War II growth. To enable autonomous development without reliance on county approvals or taxpayer funding, Disney lobbied the Florida Legislature for a special improvement district, granting the entity county-like powers such as zoning, building codes, ad valorem taxation, bond issuance, and eminent domain. The Reedy Creek Improvement District was established via Chapter 67-764, Laws of Florida (Special Acts of 1967), passed by the legislature and signed into law by Governor Claude R. Kirk Jr. on May 12, 1967, encompassing approximately 25,000 acres straddling Orange and Osceola Counties. The act also created two subsidiary municipalities—Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista—within the district to handle municipal functions, though these were later consolidated. The district's formation was unprecedented in scope for a private corporation, effectively allowing Disney to self-govern its property as a quasi-sovereign entity, responsible for all costs without subsidies from surrounding taxpayers, while shielding the company from certain state regulations. This structure facilitated the rapid construction of , which opened in 1971, by enabling efficient financing through tax-exempt bonds and streamlined permitting.

Disney's Expansion of Influence in Florida Governance

The Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID), established by the on May 12, 1967, via a special act, granted unprecedented quasi-governmental authority over approximately 25,000 acres spanning Orange and Counties to facilitate the development of the Resort. This legislation endowed the district with powers equivalent to those of a county government, including , , infrastructure provision such as roads and utilities, , , issuance of revenue bonds for capital projects, levying, and . In practice, these powers enabled Disney to operate as a self-contained , funding its own services through district-generated revenues rather than imposing costs on Orange or Counties or the state. Disney's control over the RCID's five-member board of supervisors, composed of company designees, allowed it to direct governance decisions aligned with corporate objectives, effectively creating a private fiefdom exempt from standard public oversight mechanisms. This structure facilitated rapid expansion of theme parks, hotels, and infrastructure without external bureaucratic delays, as evidenced by the district's issuance of over $1 billion in bonds by the to finance developments like Center, opened in 1982. The arrangement's longevity stemmed from Disney's economic significance, employing tens of thousands and generating substantial tax revenues for , which deterred legislative challenges to its autonomy for decades. Beyond the district's inherent powers, Disney augmented its influence through extensive political engagement, including expenditures and campaign contributions to politicians across party lines. In the 2010 cycle alone, disbursed $2.1 million to candidates, state parties, and political committees. By 2020 and 2021, the company allocated between $350,000 and $610,000 and $460,000 to $719,974 respectively to firms operating in , focusing on issues like taxation, , and . This bipartisan approach, coupled with a cadre of in-house and retained lobbyists who cultivated relationships in Tallahassee, ensured favorable legislative outcomes and the preservation of RCID's special status, positioning Disney as one of 's most formidable non-governmental political actors.

Ron DeSantis' Governorship and Policy Priorities


Ron DeSantis was elected Governor of Florida on November 6, 2018, defeating Democratic nominee Andrew Gillum by a narrow margin of 49.6% to 49.2%, or approximately 32,463 votes out of over 8 million cast. He was inaugurated on January 8, 2019, succeeding Republican Rick Scott who had won a U.S. Senate seat. DeSantis secured reelection on November 8, 2022, against former Governor Charlie Crist, achieving a landslide victory with 59.4% of the vote to Crist's 40%, a margin of nearly 19 percentage points and the largest in a Florida gubernatorial race in over 40 years. DeSantis prioritized economic growth through low taxes, , and fiscal responsibility, including tax relief measures and investments in workforce for high-demand jobs. His administration focused on positioning as a business-friendly state, with policies aimed at reducing and enhancing border security while supporting funding. These efforts contributed to 's status as a Republican stronghold, with DeSantis emphasizing independence from federal overreach in economic matters. In education, DeSantis advanced reforms to expand , defend traditional values against perceived ideological , and limit discussions of and in early grades through like the Parental Rights in Education Act. He signed multiple bills in 2023 to enact these priorities, including measures to prioritize merit-based systems and restrict certain curricula. DeSantis' governance also addressed the by resisting widespread lockdowns, keeping schools open, and issuing to suspend evictions for those impacted while prioritizing economic reopening over mandates. Regarding corporate influence, he targeted special districts granting autonomous powers, arguing they allowed entities like the Reedy Creek Improvement District to evade local regulations and wield undue political sway, leading to legislative actions to dissolve such privileges and impose state oversight. This stance reflected a broader commitment to accountable governance, curtailing what he described as "corporate kingdoms."

Catalyst: The Parental Rights in Education Act

Provisions and Legislative Passage

The Parental Rights in Education Act, codified as House Bill 1557 (HB 1557), was introduced in the during the 2022 Regular Session by Representative (R-Williston). The legislation aimed to reinforce parents' fundamental rights to direct the education and upbringing of their children by imposing restrictions on certain school practices and mandating parental involvement in student health and welfare matters. Key provisions prohibited classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on or for students in through . For students in fourth through twelfth grades, any such instruction was required to align with state academic standards and be deemed age- or developmentally appropriate by those standards. The bill also mandated that school districts notify parents in writing if the school receives information indicating a student may need mental health services or if there is a suspected change in the student's mental, physical, or emotional status. Additionally, it required written prior to a school providing any mental health, physical health, or emotional examination or treatment to a student, except in cases of imminent to or . The act further affirmed parents' to access school records and to be notified of meetings related to their child's , while prohibiting schools from adopting procedures that withhold such information from parents. Violations by school , employees, or contractors could result in civil actions by parents, allowing for injunctive , of up to $2,000 per violation, and recovery of attorney's fees and court costs. These measures were positioned as protections against schools infringing on parental authority without of widespread abuse, emphasizing first-principles parental primacy in child-rearing decisions over institutional discretion. HB 1557 passed the on February 28, 2022, by a vote of 69-47. It then advanced to the , where it passed on March 8, 2022, in a 22-17 vote following amendments and debate. Governor signed the bill into law on March 28, 2022, with an effective date of July 1, 2022. The Republican-majority legislature's approval reflected alignment with DeSantis' policy priorities on education transparency, amid opposition from Democrats and advocacy groups who argued it limited discussions on family diversity.

Disney's Public Opposition and Internal Dynamics

Disney CEO initially indicated on March 7, 2022, that the company would not take a public stance on the Parental Rights in Education Act (HB 1557), preferring to influence change through private engagement with legislators rather than overt opposition. This approach stemmed from concerns over potential backlash and the company's historical strategy of avoiding direct involvement in debates to maintain broad appeal. Internal resistance from Disney employees, particularly those in LGBTQ+ advocacy groups like Reimagine Tomorrow, intensified following the bill's advancement through the . Leaked recordings from March 2022 internal meetings revealed executives debating the risks of public opposition, with some staff accusing of prioritizing interests over employee values; one executive reportedly stated the company had been "neutrally" silent to avoid alienating conservative audiences. This discord prompted organized protests, including petitions demanding reversal of political contributions to bill supporters and threats of walkouts, highlighting a divide between rank-and-file creators in and Florida-based operations more attuned to local political realities. On March 9, 2022, Chapek publicly announced Disney's opposition after the bill passed the , stating the company had been against it from the outset and committing $5 million to organizations supporting LGBTQ+ rights while pledging to meet with Governor to express concerns. Two days later, on March 11, Chapek issued an apology to employees via internal memo, acknowledging his failure to act as a "stronger ally" and announcing a pause on all political donations in amid scrutiny over prior contributions to Republican lawmakers who backed the bill. Employee dissatisfaction persisted, culminating in walkouts on , 2022, where dozens of staff across studios protested the company's delayed and perceived insufficient response, demanding active efforts to the once signed. Following ' signing of the act on March 28, 2022, reiterated its commitment to support efforts, reflecting a shift driven by internal that ultimately aligned corporate policy with employee sentiments despite initial executive caution.

Legislative Retaliation Against Disney's Special Status

The 2022 Dissolution Bill

In April 2022, the Florida Legislature convened a special session and passed Senate Bill 4-C, legislation designed to dissolve independent special districts established by special acts prior to the 1968 ratification of the Florida Constitution, prominently including the Reedy Creek Improvement District that granted The Walt Disney Company quasi-governmental authority over its Walt Disney World property. The bill amended section 189.0311 of the Florida Statutes to mandate dissolution of these districts effective June 1, 2023, unless their governing bodies submitted applications for reestablishment via new special acts approved by the governor and Legislature. Key provisions required dissolved districts to honor existing contracts, bonds, and obligations, with successor counties or municipalities assuming responsibility for infrastructure maintenance and any unpaid debts potentially funded through ad valorem property taxes levied by the districts until dissolution. Assets and records would transfer to the relevant counties—Orange and Osceola in Reedy Creek's case—while ongoing projects could continue under transitional oversight, and the bill prohibited the creation of new independent special districts without legislative approval. Approximately 12 such pre-1968 districts statewide faced potential elimination, though Reedy Creek, spanning 25,000 acres and encompassing Disney's theme parks, drew primary scrutiny due to its extensive self-governing powers over , utilities, and taxation. The approved SB 4-C on April 19, 2022, by a 23-16 vote along party lines, with Republicans supporting and Democrats opposing; the House followed with concurrence later that day. Governor signed the measure into law on April 22, 2022, stating it addressed "corporate privileges of yesteryear" and aimed to bring districts under standard public accountability. The enactment prompted immediate concerns from Disney executives about potential tax hikes and service disruptions for the district's roughly 40 residents and millions of annual visitors, though no immediate dissolution occurred pending the 2023 deadline.

Establishment of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District was established via House Bill 9B, enacted by the Florida Legislature during a special legislative session on February 8, 2023, and signed into law by Governor Ron DeSantis on February 27, 2023. This legislation ratified the continued existence of the special improvement district originally created in 1967 as the Reedy Creek Improvement District, renaming it the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District and preventing its dissolution effective June 1, 2023, as previously scheduled under Senate Bill 4C. The renaming and restructuring shifted governance from a board elected by district landowners—effectively controlled by The Walt Disney Company—to state oversight, aiming to eliminate what state officials described as a "corporate kingdom" exempt from standard Florida regulatory constraints. HB 9B restructured the district's board as a five-member , with all members appointed by the Governor and subject to confirmation by the . Appointees must be residents and cannot have been employed by or held ownership interests in theme park operators within the district in the preceding three years; they serve four-year terms, with initial appointments staggered (two members for two years, three for four) to promote continuity, and are limited to three consecutive terms. The board holds monthly public meetings with 10 days' notice and is required to submit annual financial reports to the Department of , enhancing transparency compared to the prior structure. The district encompasses approximately 25,000 acres across Orange and Osceola counties, retaining core powers from the Reedy Creek era, including water management under Chapter 298, Florida Statutes, provision of public utilities (water, wastewater, electric power), fire protection, and roadway infrastructure. However, HB 9B eliminated certain autonomies, such as self-initiated boundary amendments, operation of airports, certain recreational facilities, and broad eminent domain outside district lands, while mandating that zoning and building codes align with or exceed state standards, ending previous exemptions from the Florida Building Code and Fire Prevention Code. Revenue authority includes ad valorem taxation (capped at 13.9000 mills, generating about $183 million in fiscal year 2022-2023) and bond issuance for infrastructure, with explicit provisions that district debts remain the responsibility of property owners, not shifted to Florida taxpayers. The legislation's intent, as articulated by Governor DeSantis, was to impose accountability on the district's operations, ensure compliance with state laws, prevent arbitrary tax increases, and align tourism-related governance with broader public interests rather than private corporate control. Periodic legislative reviews of the district's powers are mandated every five years to maintain ongoing state supervision.

State Court Challenges Over Governance Agreements

On February 8, 2023, the Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID) board, still controlled by Disney appointees, approved a 30-year development agreement and restrictive covenants with Parks and Resorts U.S. Inc., granting Disney extensive veto authority over district budgets, infrastructure plans, zoning changes, and comprehensive plans, effectively limiting the future oversight body's powers. The agreements incorporated a "royal lives" perpetuity clause, extending validity until 21 years after the death of the last surviving descendant of King Charles III, alongside standard terms to circumvent the . Following Governor Ron DeSantis's signing of House Bill 9B on February 27, 2023, which renamed the district the (CFTOD) and installed a five-member board appointed by the governor, the new board reviewed the February agreements and declared them null and void on April 19, 2023, asserting that the RCID board lacked authority to bind its successor entity after the legislative intent to dissolve special privileges was clear. The argued the contracts were acts designed to evade state law, as the RCID's existence was set to terminate under prior legislation, rendering any attempt to impose long-term restrictions on state-controlled governance invalid. On May 1, 2023, the CFTOD filed suit against in the Ninth Judicial Circuit Court in , seeking that the agreements were unenforceable and requesting their rescission, while alleging bad faith negotiation by to undermine the district's statutory mandate. countersued, contending the agreements were valid contracts executed by an authorized body during RCID's legal existence, protected under contract law, and essential to 's operational investments exceeding $30 billion in the district. The disputes centered on whether the preemptive agreements constituted lawful foresight or an impermissible circumvention of legislative repeal, with CFTOD emphasizing state sovereignty over self-dealing by a corporate ally. Proceedings advanced with motions for , delayed multiple times amid discovery disputes, including Disney's separate public records suit alleging CFTOD withholding of documents related to agreement reviews. On March 27, 2024, the parties settled, with the nullifying the February 2023 agreements and covenants as void ab initio, while approving a new 15-year development agreement allowing Disney input on planning but affirming CFTOD's ultimate authority, thereby resolving challenges without a full . This outcome preserved fiscal obligations like Disney's $790 million infrastructure commitment but curtailed the original covenants' perpetual controls.

Federal First Amendment Lawsuit and Judicial Dismissals

On April 26, 2023, filed a federal in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of against , Secretary of Commerce J. Alex Kelly, and the five members of the board of the newly established (CFTOD), the successor to Disney's Reedy Creek Improvement District. The suit alleged that the state's legislative repeal of Reedy Creek's special governance status and its replacement with the CFTOD—controlled by gubernatorial appointees—constituted targeted retaliation for Disney's public criticism of the Parental Rights in Education Act (commonly referred to as the "Don't Say Gay" bill), violating the company's First Amendment rights to free speech and petition. Disney claimed the actions formed a "targeted campaign of government retaliation" orchestrated by DeSantis and the to punish the company's viewpoint, including nullifying prior development agreements that granted Disney autonomy over zoning, infrastructure, and services in the district encompassing . The lawsuit sought declaratory and injunctive relief to invalidate the repeal legislation (Senate Bill 1600) and prevent the CFTOD board from interfering with Disney's contractual rights or engaging in retaliatory conduct. In May 2023, Disney amended its complaint to incorporate additional allegations stemming from a separate state law (Senate Bill 300) that aimed to void Disney's last-minute development agreements executed just before the Reedy Creek board's dissolution in 2022. Defendants moved to dismiss, arguing , lack of attributable to personally, and that the repeal targeted an obsolete corporate welfare rather than protected speech. U.S. District Judge Allen C. Winsor, a appointee, dismissed the entire case on January 31, 2024. In a 17-page order, Winsor ruled that lacked Article III standing to sue and Kelly, as the company could not demonstrate that its alleged injuries—loss of control and potential future harms—were traceable to those officials' direct actions rather than the Legislature's policy choice to end a unique special . Against the CFTOD board members, the held that failed to state a plausible First Amendment claim, noting no concrete retaliatory acts had occurred post-appointment and that prospective fears of viewpoint did not suffice without specific allegations of chilled speech or adverse actions tied to 's position on the education law. Winsor emphasized that the repeal legislation applied prospectively to all special districts while singling out Reedy Creek for immediate termination, but rejected the notion of unconstitutional retaliation absent evidence of improper motive overriding legislative discretion. Disney announced its intent to appeal the dismissal to the Eleventh of Appeals, maintaining that the ruling overlooked of DeSantis's public statements linking the to Disney's opposition to the education act. However, following a separate settlement in state court litigation on March 27, 2024, Disney placed the federal appeal in abeyance, effectively pausing further judicial proceedings on the First Amendment claims amid broader resolution of the governance dispute.

Resolution and Aftermath

The 2024 Settlement Agreement

On March 27, 2024, and the —controlled by appointees of Governor —reached a settlement resolving state court lawsuits over governance of the special district encompassing Resort. The agreement, approved unanimously by the district's board during a public meeting that day, voided a comprehensive development and restrictive covenant agreement that Disney's prior board had enacted on February 8, 2023, just before the Reedy Creek Improvement District's dissolution. This last-minute deal had granted Disney extensive self-governing powers, including veto authority over district decisions and exemptions from zoning changes, which state lawmakers and DeSantis argued undermined the new oversight regime established by Senate Bill 1600 in February 2023. Key provisions included Disney's commitment to dismiss its public records lawsuit against the district and to forgo further challenges to the board's authority, while the state agreed to drop its counterclaims alleging the 2023 agreement was an unlawful attempt to circumvent legislative repeal of Disney's special status. The settlement effectively affirmed 's transition to state control, ending nearly two years of litigation triggered by Disney's public opposition to the Parental in Education Act in 2022. No monetary payments or concessions on tax exemptions were detailed in the terms, focusing instead on mutual releases from ongoing disputes to facilitate future development negotiations. As part of the resolution, Disney suspended its appeal in the parallel federal alleging First Amendment retaliation, allowing both parties to pursue a replacement development agreement without legal impediments. This paved the way for board approval of a new comprehensive plan in June 2024, which Disney described as enabling continued investments exceeding $17 billion over the next decade while subjecting projects to standard district oversight. The accord marked a , with stating it restored "accountability" to the district's 25,000 acres, and Disney emphasizing a return to "business as usual" free from retaliatory governance.

Ongoing Governance Changes and Fiscal Adjustments

Following the March 27, 2024, settlement agreement between Parks and Resorts and the (CFTOD), which nullified a prior enacted by the former Reedy Creek Improvement District board, the parties negotiated a new comprehensive development agreement. On June 12, 2024, the CFTOD board approved this agreement, authorizing to pursue up to $17 billion in capital investments over the subsequent 10 to 20 years, including , theme expansions, and commercial developments, while committing to updates in land regulations by September 2024 and a comprehensive plan revision by the third quarter of 2025. Governance under the CFTOD has emphasized increased accountability and transparency, as mandated by House Bill 9-B (2023), which requires annual reports on the district's powers and authorities. A comprehensive of prior operations revealed self-serving contracts and excessive expenditures by Disney-affiliated entities, such as millions in complimentary annual passes and 40% discounts on cruises for district employees, prompting reforms including oversight of the by the for the first time in 50 years. The board has prioritized local business engagement through the "BUY LOCAL NOW" initiative, awarding $9.6 million in contracts to regional vendors. On February 14, 2025, Governor appointed Alexis Yarbrough as board chair, along with John Gilbert and Scott Workman as new members, subject to confirmation, reshaping the five-member supervisory board to further align with state priorities for fiscal responsibility and community benefits. These appointees, including Yarbrough from the District Board of Trustees and Gilbert as an executive with local business ties, replaced prior members to sustain post-settlement cooperation while enforcing competitive procurement. Fiscal adjustments have focused on cost containment and revenue stability, yielding $18.4 million in taxpayer savings through reforms and competitive that redirected $4.6 million to local contractors, thereby reducing the district's overall burden. The district's utilities division, responsible for electric, water, and wastewater services, maintained an 'A+' rating from in October 2025, reflecting nimble rate adjustments—including a midyear 10% increase—to address operational needs without compromising financial resilience. Electric rate schedules were updated effective for billings after September 30, 2025, supporting ongoing infrastructure demands tied to approved developments.

Controversies and Viewpoints

Arguments for Ending Corporate Special Districts

Proponents of ending corporate special districts, such as 's Reedy Creek Improvement District, argue that these entities grant private corporations quasi-governmental powers without corresponding democratic accountability. Created in 1967, Reedy Creek allowed to appoint its own board, levy ad valorem taxes on residents and businesses within the district, issue tax-exempt bonds, and exercise , all while exempting the company from many state regulations and local . This structure effectively positioned as a self-governing entity over 27,000 acres, operating without oversight from elected officials accountable to taxpayers. A primary contention is that such districts foster unaccountable corporate fiefdoms, enabling companies to wield public authority for private gain. Under Reedy Creek, Disney's unelected board controlled infrastructure development, emergency services, and financial decisions benefiting the corporation, such as funding roads and utilities that primarily served theme parks rather than broader public needs. Advocates for dissolution, including lawmakers, emphasized that this setup violated principles of representative , as district residents—many Disney employees—lacked voting rights over the board, contrasting with standard special districts requiring public elections. House Bill 9B, signed by Governor on February 27, 2023, addressed this by mandating a publicly appointed five-member board, transparent budgeting, and public access to records, thereby restoring oversight to state authorities. Fiscal fairness forms another core argument, with critics highlighting how corporate districts enable exemptions and subsidies that distort competition. Reedy Creek's exemptions from the Florida Building Code, fire prevention standards, and ride safety reviews allowed Disney to bypass costs imposed on competitors like and , creating an uneven playing field. The district's ability to issue low-interest municipal bonds, backed indirectly by its taxing authority, further subsidized Disney's expansions, estimated to have saved the company hundreds of millions annually in compliance and financing costs. Ending these privileges, as enacted in HB 9B, requires Disney to fund directly and eliminates tax-exempt bond issuance reliant on public subsidies, promoting equitable taxation across operators. Broader concerns include the precedent of corporate welfare through special legislation, which proponents claim erodes in impartiality. Longstanding critiques, predating the 2022 dispute, noted Reedy Creek's role in granting regulatory unavailable to other developers, potentially encouraging behavior where firms lobby for bespoke privileges. By dissolving unchecked , reformers argued for aligning corporate operations with statewide standards, ensuring infrastructure and services comply with uniform safety and environmental rules rather than company-specific waivers. This shift, while initially raising debt transfer issues resolved in subsequent legislation, ultimately prioritizes taxpayer protection over perpetual corporate exemptions.

Claims of Retaliatory Overreach and Free Speech Concerns

Disney executives publicly opposed Florida's Parental Rights in Education Act, signed into law by Governor on March 8, 2022, with CEO stating on March 28, 2022, that the company regretted not opposing it earlier and would support efforts to repeal it. In response, the convened a starting April 12, 2022, and passed Senate Bill 4-C, which signed on April 22, 2022, dissolving the Reedy Creek Improvement District—a special district granting autonomous governance powers since 1967—and replacing it with the state-controlled . Critics, including , contended that this legislative action constituted retaliatory overreach, targeting a private corporation for exercising political speech protected under the First Amendment. On April 26, 2023, Disney filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of , alleging that and state officials violated the company's First Amendment rights by enacting laws "targeting Disney because it publicly opposed" the education act. The complaint argued that the repeal was not a neutral reform but a viewpoint-discriminatory punishment, citing ' public statements, such as his February 2023 remark that Disney had "crossed the line" by attempting to influence state . Disney later amended the suit on August 9, 2023, to narrow its focus exclusively to free speech retaliation claims, dropping contract-related allegations after state courts invalidated prior development agreements. Supporters of the claims, including the Reporters Committee for , warned that such government retaliation against corporate speech could chill broader expressive activities, including journalistic advocacy, by signaling that criticism invites punitive state intervention. DeSantis and Florida officials countered that the repeal addressed longstanding concerns over unelected corporate self-rule, with DeSantis describing Reedy Creek as an "unaccountable" entity exempt from standard taxes and regulations, and emphasizing that the action fulfilled campaign promises to eliminate special districts predating his tenure. However, the temporal proximity—mere weeks between Disney's opposition and the —fueled arguments of causation, with legal analyses noting that while corporate political speech is protected, courts must distinguish legitimate reforms from retaliatory animus, a distinction tested when U.S. District Judge Allen C. Winsor dismissed the suit on January 31, 2024, ruling Disney lacked standing to challenge the law's retaliatory intent absent ongoing harm. These claims highlighted tensions between state sovereignty over local and protections against reprisal for speech, though empirical evidence of overreach remained contested, as Florida retained to districts without necessitating viewpoint-based targeting.

Economic and Taxpayer Implications

The Reedy Creek Improvement District, established in 1967, enabled The Walt Disney Company to self-finance infrastructure, emergency services, and utilities on its 27,000-acre property without imposing direct property tax burdens on Orange and Osceola County residents, as Disney covered these costs through bond issuances and payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT) directed to the district. In fiscal year 2022, Disney accounted for over 85% of the district's approximately $185 million in ad valorem tax collections, funding services that would otherwise have required county taxpayer support. This arrangement generated broader economic benefits for Florida, with Walt Disney World Resort contributing $40.3 billion in statewide economic impact, sustaining 250,000 jobs, and paying over $1.1 billion in state and local taxes annually. The 2022 legislative repeal of Reedy Creek and its replacement with the state-controlled Central Florida Tourism Oversight District (CFTOD) raised concerns about shifting up to $1.7 billion in district bond liabilities and service obligations to county taxpayers, potentially necessitating tax increases for local residents to cover fire protection, roads, and other infrastructure previously managed by Disney. However, the creation of CFTOD under Governor Ron DeSantis's appointees maintained the district's structure, avoiding immediate debt assumption by counties and allowing the board to review and void prior contracts that allegedly funneled millions in district funds toward Disney-favored perks, such as discounted tickets and merchandise totaling $2.5 million. The new oversight has prioritized cost reductions, including proposals to eliminate property taxes within the district over time and curb overtime spending, while incurring short-term expenses like $4.5 million in projected 2024 legal fees and up to $360,000 for audits of past management. DeSantis administration officials have asserted that these reforms save taxpayer money by fostering competition and small business opportunities in the region, rather than perpetuating a "corporate kingdom." Critics of the original Reedy Creek model argued it enabled Disney to bypass approximately $200 million annually in county taxes and impact fees that other developers would pay, depriving local governments of revenue for regional infrastructure. The CFTOD's enhanced state control facilitates potential recapture of such fees through standardized oversight, though Disney maintains that its model efficiently supported massive private investments without public subsidies. The 2024 settlement agreement, reached on March 27, preserved Disney's ability to pursue $17 billion in future expansions over 10 to 20 years, signaling sustained economic contributions amid resolved governance disputes, including a new development agreement approved in June 2024. Overall, the transition has not led to verifiable taxpayer cost increases for residents, as the district's fiscal responsibilities remain contained, while enabling measures that proponents claim prevent undue corporate privileges.

Broader Impacts

Effects on Florida's Political Landscape

The Disney-DeSantis dispute reinforced Governor ' image as a leader willing to confront corporate influence perceived as aligned with progressive causes, resonating strongly with Florida's Republican base. Polling conducted by in 2023 indicated that a majority of voters approved of DeSantis' handling of the conflict, with 54% siding with him over compared to 30% supporting the company. Among Republicans specifically, support for DeSantis' actions reached 64%, reflecting broad endorsement within the party for challenging what was framed as Disney's overreach in political advocacy. This alignment contributed to DeSantis securing a re-election in November 2022, defeating Democratic challenger by 19 percentage points (59.4% to 40.0%), amid a campaign emphasizing resistance to "woke" corporate . The feud also prompted legislative changes that diminished special district autonomies across , signaling a policy shift towards greater state oversight of corporate-governed entities and reducing exemptions from standard taxation and regulation. On February 8, 2023, signed Senate Bill 160, which nullified Disney's last-minute development agreements and imposed new fiscal responsibilities, including back taxes estimated at $200-400 million annually, thereby curtailing privileges originally granted in 1967. This move exemplified a broader Republican strategy in to prioritize taxpayer equity over corporate , influencing subsequent governance reforms and deterring similar arrangements for other large employers. While some business-oriented Republicans expressed reservations about potential economic deterrence, the policy solidified ' appeal to populist conservatives, enhancing party cohesion on cultural and fiscal accountability issues. Following the March 27, 2024, settlement, which resolved state court challenges and allowed to retain key development approvals under supervision, the political ramifications underscored limits to retaliatory while affirming state authority. described the outcome as a victory for taxpayers, avoiding $2 billion in potential infrastructure costs shifted to the state, though critics noted 's effective retention of influence via elected board members post-November 2024. The resolution did not alter 's Republican dominance, with the party maintaining supermajorities in the legislature (28-12 , 84-36 as of 2025), but it highlighted growing corporate caution in engaging state politics, as evidenced by reduced overt opposition from firms like to 's and social policies thereafter. Overall, the episode entrenched a landscape where cultural conservatism increasingly intersects with economic , influencing Republican platforms to emphasize for politically active corporations.

Shifts in Corporate Political Engagement

The Disney-DeSantis dispute, culminating in the revocation of the Reedy Creek Improvement District's special autonomous status in 2023, exemplified the vulnerabilities corporations face when publicly opposing state-level legislation on cultural issues, prompting a reevaluation of overt political advocacy. Florida's actions, including the appointment of a state-controlled board to oversee Disney World's governance, demonstrated how elected officials could leverage regulatory tools to counter corporate influence, leading Disney to incur legal costs exceeding $200 million and face development restrictions. This outcome underscored the potential for backlash, as DeSantis's measures were framed as a response to Disney's vocal opposition to the Parental Rights in Education Act, influencing corporate leaders to prioritize operational stability over ideological stances. In response, Disney CEO Bob Iger explicitly distanced the company from further entanglement in cultural conflicts, stating in July 2023 that "the last thing I want is for the company to be drawn into any culture wars" amid ongoing litigation. By December 2023, Iger urged content creators to emphasize over political messaging, acknowledging criticisms of recent films for prioritizing agendas that alienated audiences and stakeholders. This internal pivot reflected a strategic retreat, evidenced by Disney's 2025 decision to eliminate two (DEI) programs previously highlighted in SEC filings, amid investor pressure and broader market scrutiny of such initiatives. The episode contributed to a wider trend among U.S. corporations toward de-emphasizing politically charged social activism, with "" communications in reports declining since 2020 due to fears of replicating Disney's experience. High-profile backlashes, including Disney's overhaul, paralleled consumer-driven repercussions elsewhere—such as Anheuser-Busch's $1.4 billion sales drop following its 2023 campaign—reinforcing the financial perils of alienating conservative demographics or inviting governmental reprisals. Analyses indicate that such risks have elevated agency costs and unpredictability in corporate , encouraging firms to confine engagement to traditional rather than public cultural interventions. By 2025, major companies increasingly abandoned expansive DEI frameworks, viewing them as liabilities in polarized environments where state-level policies could impose direct operational penalties.

Lessons for Government-Corporate Relations

The Disney-DeSantis dispute exemplifies how state governments can exercise legislative authority to dismantle long-standing special districts that confer quasi-sovereign powers on corporations, such as the Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID), which since 1967 allowed to self-govern 27,000 acres, issue tax-exempt bonds exceeding $1 billion, and exempt itself from certain county-level taxes and regulations. In April 2022, following Disney's public opposition to the Parental Rights in Education Act, Florida's legislature repealed RCID via a special , replacing it with the publicly appointed (CFTOD) effective June 2023, thereby reasserting state oversight over infrastructure, zoning, and fiscal decisions previously insulated from electoral accountability. This action highlights a core principle of government-corporate relations: privileges granted by statute are not perpetual and can be revoked by subsequent legislatures without violating constitutional norms, provided the repeal applies prospectively and addresses public interest concerns like fiscal opacity in corporate-controlled entities. A key lesson emerges regarding the risks of corporate political activism: when firms leverage their economic influence to contest state policies on culturally divisive issues, they invite retaliatory scrutiny of their own taxpayer-subsidized advantages, potentially eroding goodwill with regulators and legislators. Disney's corporate pledge in March 2022 to work against the education law—framed by company leaders as protecting employee values—correlated with the swift legislative response, which signed on February 8, 2023, after the bill's passage. Empirical outcomes temper narratives of existential corporate harm; Disney's theme park attendance and investments persisted, with the company announcing a $17 billion expansion commitment by June 2024 post-settlement, suggesting that while political missteps can escalate costs (including legal fees and uncertainty), market-driven enterprises often adapt rather than relocate en masse. This underscores causal realism in relations: corporations dependent on state infrastructure and tax policies may overestimate their leverage in ideological clashes, as elected officials, accountable to voters, prioritize correcting perceived over accommodating private . The case also reveals the boundaries of First Amendment protections for corporate speech in regulatory contexts. Disney's federal lawsuit, filed April 26, 2022, alleged viewpoint discrimination and retaliation, but U.S. District Judge dismissed it on January 31, 2024, ruling that the repeal targeted the special district's structure rather than Disney's opinions, as similar districts elsewhere faced no protection from legislative amendment. The March 27, 2024, state court settlement—wherein Disney withdrew appeals and the CFTOD board ratified prior development agreements—averted prolonged litigation without restoring full corporate control, affirming that courts are reluctant to enjoin sovereign acts absent clear animus, thus cautioning firms against presuming judicial intervention shields business privileges from policy reversals. Fiscal reforms under CFTOD provide evidence-based insights into balancing corporate efficiency with public accountability. Pre-repeal, RCID's self-funding model avoided direct county subsidies but enabled opaque debt issuance and no-bid contracts, prompting concerns over $4 billion in potential liabilities shifted to Orange and Osceola counties until Florida's HB 9B (2023) authorized state bond assumption without residential tax hikes. Post-reform, the district implemented audits, public meetings, and vendor competition by February 2024, yielding cost savings and transparency absent under Disney's tenure, while Disney retained operational autonomy over parks. This demonstrates that government intervention in corporate fiefdoms need not stifle investment if structured to preserve economic incentives, offering a model for scrutinizing special districts nationwide—over 38,000 exist in the U.S.—to mitigate risks of unaccountable power concentration without broad economic disruption. In sum, the resolution teaches that durable government-corporate partnerships hinge on mutual recognition of electoral sovereignty and , discouraging both unchecked corporate and punitive overreach in favor of pragmatic that aligns private innovation with public fiscal prudence.

References

  1. https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/disney-florida-ron-desantis-parental-rights-in-education
  2. https://www.nytimes.com/article/disney-florida-desantis.html
  3. https://www.factcheck.org/2022/05/desantis-vs-disney-qa/
  4. https://www.flgov.com/eog/news/press/2023/governor-ron-desantis-signs-legislation-ending-corporate-kingdom-walt-disney-world
  5. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67271062/walt-disney-parks-and-resorts-us-inc-v-desantis/
  6. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68157268
  7. https://mynews13.com/fl/orlando/news/2024/06/13/with-development-agreement-complete--disney-withdraws-last-lawsuit-against-desantis--appointees
  8. https://www.npr.org/2024/03/28/1241296687/florida-governor-ron-desantis-disney-legal-battle-settled
  9. https://sports-entertainment.brooklaw.edu/media/the-most-magical-lawsuit-on-earth-disney-v-desantis/
  10. https://d23.com/we-say-its-disney/
  11. https://allears.net/2021/11/08/how-walt-kept-disney-world-a-secret/
  12. https://home.heinonline.org/blog/2022/06/history-and-repeal-of-walt-disney-worlds-special-tax-district/
  13. https://oppaga.fl.gov/Products/ReportDetail?rn=04-81
  14. https://d23.com/a-to-z/reedy-creek-improvement-district/
  15. https://law.justia.com/cases/florida/supreme-court/1968/37569-0.html
  16. https://sites.google.com/site/theoriginalepcot/project-vs-reality/the-reedy-creek-improvement-district
  17. https://thatparkplace.com/the-history-of-reedy-creek-and-why-it-mattered-to-disney/
  18. https://www.oversightdistrict.org/about_cftod/
  19. https://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1440&context=umblr
  20. https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1123&context=lr
  21. https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/politics/2021/10/14/walt-disney-world-remains-florida-biggest-political-power-50-years-later/5919720001/
  22. https://www.floridatrend.com/article/27473/walt-disney-worlds-political-spending/
  23. https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/03/the-walt-disney-company-the-home-of-mice-magic-and-money/
  24. https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/florida/governor
  25. https://www.wuft.org/2022-11-09/desantis-wins-2022-florida-governors-race-by-largest-margin-in-40-years
  26. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/08/florida-governor-2022-ron-desantis-charlie-crist-00065788
  27. https://www.flgov.com/eog/news/press/2025/governor-ron-desantis-announces-focus-fiscal-responsibility-2025-2026-budget
  28. https://ballotpedia.org/Ron_DeSantis_presidential_campaign%2C_2024
  29. https://jamesmadison.org/education-next-desantis-defends-values-while-expanding-choice-to-de-escalate-the-stakes/
  30. https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2023/05/desantis-enacts-major-education-priorities-00095948
  31. https://www.fldoe.org/newsroom/latest-news/governor-ron-desantis-highlights-administrations-major-accomplishments-of-2020.stml
  32. https://www.npr.org/2023/02/28/1160018771/disney-world-desantis-special-district
  33. https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/disney-reedy-creek-florida-state-could-take-control-new-proposal-rcna64664
  34. https://legiscan.com/FL/bill/H1557/2022
  35. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/Analyses/h1557z.EEC.PDF
  36. https://www.flgov.com/eog/news/press/2022/governor-ron-desantis-signs-historic-bill-protect-parental-rights-education
  37. https://news.wttw.com/2022/03/08/florida-legislature-passes-bill-prohibiting-some-classroom-instruction-about-sexual
  38. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557
  39. https://instituteforpr.org/wp-content/uploads/TROUBLEINPARADISE_case.pdf
  40. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/disney-ceo-bob-chapek-florida-dont-say-gay-bill-response-1235105879/
  41. https://variety.com/2022/film/news/disney-dont-say-gay-bill-bob-chapek-reactions-1235198226/
  42. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/27671127.2025.2489095
  43. https://www.npr.org/2022/03/08/1085130633/disney-response-florida-bill-dont-say-gay
  44. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/disney-ceo-expresses-public-disappointment-with-florida-bill-limiting-lgbt-2022-03-09/
  45. https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/11/media/disney-chapek-apology-florida-lgbtq
  46. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/11/disney-pauses-political-donations-in-florida-over-dont-say-gay-bill-backlash.html
  47. https://www.npr.org/2022/03/22/1088048998/disney-walkout-dont-say-gay-bill
  48. https://www.businessinsider.com/disney-employees-protest-dont-say-gay-bill-photos-2022-3
  49. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/28/disney-vows-to-help-repeal-dont-say-gay-law.html
  50. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022C/4C
  51. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022C/4C/Analyses/2022s00004C.ca.PDF
  52. https://www.lowndes-law.com/newsroom/insights/dissolving-disneys-reedy-creek-improvement-district-the-impacts-of-sb-4-c
  53. https://apnews.com/article/business-travel-florida-orlando-ron-desantis-5bbb7bd13c5357877f999aab96b33651
  54. https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article260623452.html
  55. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023B/9B
  56. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023B/9B/Analyses/h0009Ba.SAC.PDF
  57. https://www.oversightdistrict.org/
  58. https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000018e-8071-d570-adaf-a47778d90001
  59. https://www.newsweek.com/ron-desantis-disney-board-reedy-creek-1791369
  60. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/03/30/desantis-disney-world-board-loophole/
  61. https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2023/03/30/how-disney-stripped-power-from-florida-gov-desantis-special-district-board/
  62. https://www.oversightdistrict.org/pr-dismiss/
  63. https://www.scribd.com/document/717697790/CFTOD-v-Disney
  64. https://hls.harvard.edu/today/rebecca-tushnet-analyzes-disneys-lawsuit-against-ron-desantis/
  65. https://www.courthousenews.com/disney-countersues-florida-governors-oversight-board/
  66. https://wdwnt.com/2024/03/summary-judgement-hearing-delayed-again-in-central-florida-tourism-oversight-district-lawsuit-against-disney/
  67. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/disney-and-disney-world-governing-district-deal-sealed-desantic-appointees/
  68. https://blogmickey.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Disney-CFTOD-settlement-agreement.pdf
  69. https://www.npr.org/2024/01/31/1228213346/disney-lawsuit-florida-governor-ron-desantis-thrown-out
  70. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/31/business/disney-ron-desantis-lawsuit.html
  71. https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/post/federal-judge-dismisses-disneys-free-speech-lawsuit-against-desantis/
  72. https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/disney-lawsuit-against-desantis-dismissed-why-explainer-rcna136622
  73. https://deadline.com/2024/01/disney-ron-desantis-lawsuit-dismissed-1235810031/
  74. https://apnews.com/article/disney-florida-ron-desantis-settlement-91040178ad4708939e621dd57bc5e494
  75. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/27/ron-desantis-disney-settlement
  76. https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/27/business/desantis-disney-fight-reaches-settlement
  77. https://www.axios.com/2024/03/27/disney-desantis-lawsuit-settlement-agreement
  78. https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/27/disney-and-florida-settle-lawsuits-over-desantis-special-district-fight-dont-say-gay-bill.html
  79. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/27/disney-world-desantis-fight-00149320
  80. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/desantis-allies-disney-reach-settlement-in-lawsuit-over-parks-governing-district
  81. https://www.oversightdistrict.org/cftod-board-greenlights-historic-development-agreement/
  82. https://mynews13.com/fl/orlando/news/2024/06/13/disney-cftod-agreement-
  83. https://mynews13.com/fl/orlando/news/2024/06/05/tourism-oversight-district-throws-support-behind--17-billion-disney-development-plan
  84. https://www.flgov.com/eog/news/press/2024/governor-ron-desantis-brings-accountability-central-florida-tourism-oversight
  85. https://www.flgov.com/eog/news/press/2025/governor-ron-desantis-appoints-three-central-florida-tourism-oversight-district
  86. https://floridapolitics.com/archives/721309-gov-desantis-appoints-3-new-members-onto-disney-worlds-governing-board/
  87. https://www.fitchratings.com/research/us-public-finance/fitch-rates-central-florida-tourism-oversight-dist-util-revs-a-upgrades-ratings-outlook-stable-17-10-2025
  88. https://www.oversightdistrict.org/utilities/rate-schedules/
  89. https://ww3.rics.org/uk/en/modus/built-environment/commercial-real-estate/disney-vs-desantis.html
  90. https://www.wuwf.org/florida-news/2023-02-09/florida-house-passes-reedy-creek-changes
  91. https://katv.com/news/nation-world/disney-government-kept-in-dark-about-effect-of-law-dissolving-it-ron-desantis-florida-gender-race-coranvirus-donald-greer-reedy-creek-improvement-district-john-classe-fitch-ratings-negative-watch-list?photo=1
  92. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023B/9B/Analyses/2023h00009B.rc.PDF
  93. https://lawreview.syr.edu/disney-sues-florida-government-for-first-amendment-violation/
  94. https://firstamendmentwatch.org/disney-sues-desantis-claiming-retaliation-for-denouncing-floridas-dont-say-gay-bill/
  95. https://www.rcfp.org/briefs-comments/disney-v-desantis/
  96. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/04/26/disney-desantis-lawsuit-retaliation/
  97. https://firstamendmentwatch.org/disney-narrows-scope-of-lawsuit-against-desantis-to-free-speech-claims/
  98. https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/27/us/reedy-creek-disney-whats-next
  99. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/31/walt-disney-ron-desantis-lawsuit-dismissed
  100. https://lawpublications.barry.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1207&context=barrylrev
  101. https://verfassungsblog.de/disney-v-desantis-creates-strange-bedfellows/
  102. https://www.mondayeconomist.com/p/reedy-creek-makes-economic-sense
  103. https://blogmickey.com/2023/09/who-is-the-taxpayer-disney-world-accounts-for-more-than-85-of-taxes-paid-in-the-central-florida-tourism-oversight-district/
  104. https://disneyexperiences.com/disneyworld/economic-impact/
  105. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/21/disney-special-district-florida-taxpayers-could-face-a-1-billion-debt-bomb-if-dissolved.html
  106. https://www.floridatoday.com/story/money/business/2022/04/23/disney-desantis-florida-dissolves-reedy-creek-impact/7408784001/
  107. https://deadline.com/2023/08/desantis-disney-reedy-creek-unethical-perks-1235525155/
  108. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/23/disney-district-legal-fees-desantis-00112464
  109. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2023/12/13/disney-world-oversight-district-spent-up-to-360k-on-scathing-report/
  110. https://www.oversightdistrict.org/document/3-27-24-bos-meeting-package/
  111. https://news.wfsu.org/state-news/2024-03-27/disney-has-settled-a-lawsuit-with-allies-of-gov-ron-desantis
  112. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/disney-wins-approval-17b-development-deal-desantis-truce-1235922475/
  113. https://floridapolitics.com/archives/622494-florida-voters-still-like-ron-desantis-as-governor-and-side-with-him-over-disney/
  114. https://floridapolitics.com/archives/607001-more-polling-shows-republicans-want-ron-desantis-disney-war/
  115. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/ron-desantis-bets-big-disney-feud-rcna82734
  116. https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/06/politics/ron-desantis-florida-disney-republicans
  117. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68675795
  118. https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/data-download/enormous-numbers-desantis-fight-disney-rcna81019
  119. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/disney-desantis-settlement-florida-1235862516/
  120. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/20/disney-desantis-fight-new-phase.html
  121. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/13/disney-ceo-bob-iger-desantis-00106214
  122. https://nypost.com/2023/07/13/disney-ceo-bob-iger-doesnt-want-company-drawn-into-any-culture-wars/
  123. https://www.lemonde.fr/en/economy/article/2023/12/02/disney-boss-calls-on-creators-to-focus-on-entertainment-not-political-message_6306848_19.html
  124. https://nypost.com/2025/02/10/media/disney-dumps-two-dei-programs-as-investors-pressure-company/
  125. https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/disney-drops-two-dei-programs-latest-sec-filing-investors-pressure-company-do-more
  126. https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/23/01/2024/post-woke-corporate-america-has-reduced-woke-communications-2020
  127. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-65428204
  128. https://businesslawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/how-did-corporations-get-stuck-politics-and-can-they-escape
  129. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2025/jan/2/editorial-sanity-returns-2025-companies-ditch-woke/
  130. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/disney-dei-efforts-trump-1236133132/
  131. https://www.reuters.com/legal/florida-governor-disney-reach-settlement-ap-reports-2024-03-27/
  132. https://www.wusf.org/politics-issues/2024-06-05/disney-set-to-invest-17-billion-in-parks-desantis-settlement
  133. https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2024/03/29/are-disney-desantis-making-up-both-look-ready-work-together/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.