The ongoing saga of The Walt Disney Company vs. Ron Desantis and its unhappy oversight board remains in place.
In the Governor of Floridais the latest attempt to exert its power against Disney and its theme parks for violating his “Don’t Say Gay” law under other violations of the civil rights of Florida’s marginalized people and alliesHe is requesting that the ongoing legal dispute be discontinued. In a detailed report by deadline, the governor anticipates Disney’s counterclaims against the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District. His legal team hit back in a filing in state court in Orange County, Florida, writing that the agreements were “null and void under state law.” In a rather desperate attempt to get the courts to side with them when it comes to a legitimate agreement.
This agreement was a clever last-minute move by Disney to protect its control over development in its theme park area under the Royal Lives clause. The incredible but true rule that Disney publicly presented in the presence of the press to confirm the clause is: “[a] The royal life clause is a contractual clause which requires that a particular right must be exercised within the lifetime plus 21 years of the last living descendant of a British monarch who was alive at the time the contract was made. The rule generally affects two types of transactions, namely trusts and options to acquire property,” as defined in USLegal.com. It doesn’t cover royal children yet to be born, so Disney is protecting Prince Harry’s daughter Princess Lilibet – currently 2 years old – until 21 years after her death, to support their claim that DeSantis and his board repeatedly violate the First Amendment would have rights. “The [DeSantis-appointed] “The District’s retaliatory interference with the declaration of law contracts and its predicates has weakened and continues to weaken Disney’s protected speech,” the company’s legal department stated.
It hasn’t stopped DeSantis from publicly embarrassing himself by allowing this farce to continue and attempting to invalidate the development agreements that Disney wisely entered into. Their best attempt to get the courts on their side is as follows: “First, a development agreement for.” Walt Disney World This is highly unusual as there has been development activity in the area for more than 55 years without any development agreement.” They say the company has never done this before. Well, that wasn’t necessary, but they had the right to do so, they just didn’t know what they were dealing with or didn’t really qualify as clueless picks of DeSantis.
Stay tuned to io9 for more updates on Disney vs. DeSantis.
Want more io9 news? Find out when you can expect the latest Wonder, war of starsAnd Star Trek Releases, what’s next for the DC Universe in film and televisionand everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.