If DeSantis wins First Amendment lawsuit, Disney predicts spread of speech suppression

In recent filings in the ongoing legal feud between Disney and Gov. Ron DeSantis, the theme park giant warns that a courtroom win for the running-for-president Republican will open up the floodgates for speech suppression.

"If the State’s strategy succeeds, Disney will assuredly not be the last entity punished for espousing disfavored viewpoints," the company wrote earlier this week.

Disney accuses DeSantis and his allies of weaponizing the government to retaliate against it for opposing 2022 legislation, dubbed "Don't Say Gay" by critics, that restricts classroom instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation.

In a federal lawsuit, the company says its critical comments were protected by the First Amendment, and the state's actions in response were unconstitutional.

"If the line is not drawn here, there is no line at all," Disney wrote, responding to the latest attempts by those sued to throw out the case.

Defendants' take

In their latest attempt, the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District's board and its administrator, Glen Gilzean Jr., pulled a reverse Uno card and accused Disney of trying to step on the Constitution.

They say Disney is improperly invoking the First Amendment to impugn the state's "sovereign power" to determine that district's governing structure.

"This case is a frontal assault on this bedrock principle of our constitutional order," they wrote in a filing urging U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor to dismiss the lawsuit.

Until recently, the district was called the Reedy Creek Improvement District, which was created by the state Legislature in the 1960s and gave Disney self-governing power.

But then Disney criticized the so-called "Don't Say Gay" policy, officially named the Parental Rights in Education Act. Among other actions, DeSantis, with the help of GOP lawmakers, stripped Disney's control of the district and gave it to himself.

"[Disney] prefers the old structure and governing composition of the [district], which gave Disney de facto authority to govern itself through hand-picked board members, to the current democratically responsive governing entity established by the people of Florida acting through their elected representatives, which places appointment authority with the Governor," the district defendants wrote.

After getting sued in federal court, the district sued Disney in state court, and Disney has since filed counterclaims.

The governor himself is a defendant in the federal case, which was filed in April. Also named is former acting Secretary of the Department of Economic Opportunity Meredith Ivey. A 2023 law has since changed the department's name to the Department of Commerce, which is led by Alex Kelly, who's also the governor's acting chief of staff.

In a separate motion to dismiss, the state defendants said the district takeover was about fairness, not retaliation.

"[Reedy Creek] gave Disney carte blanche to govern itself," they write, calling the lawsuit the company's "last-ditch effort to reinstate its corporate kingdom."

A walkthrough of the legal drama:Disney vs. DeSantis timeline: What happened when Florida's governor took on the Mouse

First Amendment experts take on case:Feud between DeSantis, Disney could have profound implications on corporate speech

Were anti-Disney actions really about fairness?

While DeSantis says the actions against Disney were focused on fairness, he's also repeatedly connected the crackdown with what he calls Disney's "woke" criticism of his signature parental rights law. 

"Leaders must be willing to stand up and fight back when big corporations make the mistake, as Disney did, of using their economic might to advance a political agenda," DeSantis wrote in his 2023 book, "The Courage to Free."

First Amendment experts have told the USA TODAY NETWORK-Florida that such comments make Disney's lawsuit a strong one.

Like Disney itself in the recent filings, those experts say how the court rules could send shockwaves across the United States, with big implications for corporate speech and how governments respond to it.

"Other corporations are remaining silent, because Disney is one of the most powerful corporations in the world," said Lyrissa Lidsky, the University of Florida's Raymond and Miriam Ehrlich Chair in U.S. Constitutional Law, in a summer interview. "If you can target Disney, who's next?"

In Disney's latest legal words, DeSantis and his allies seek "what is, in effect, immunity for their openly retaliatory actions."

This reporting content is supported by a partnership with Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners. USA Today Network-Florida First Amendment reporter Douglas Soule is based in Tallahassee, Fla. He can be reached at DSoule@gannett.com. Twitter: @DouglasSoule.