Disney sidesteps DeSantis Board

[EnterpriseSovereign]

And this is the guy who is supposed to be vying with Trump for the Republican presidential nomination? Unless there's a third contender it's going to be a case of which is the lesser of two evils?

[Gandalf]

DeSantis is fighting for the Trump flavoured Republican vote. Others like Nikki Haley are competing for the not-Trump vote.

[Highlord Laan]

DeSantis is fighting for the Trump flavoured Republican vote. Others like Nikki Haley are competing for the not-Trump vote.

I would love it if the fascist ticket was split in 2024.

State side, I can only hope it gets worse over the next year. Pile on more and more until the fascists either get themselves voted out, or engage in such blatant manipulation and falsehood that they finally face active response.

[Broomstick]

DeSantis-appointed Oversight Board Countersues Disney

The lawyers will profit this year.

[Broomstick]

For a moment, imagine a hypothetical where a corporation sues a governor over a law that they don't like. But, unlike Disney, the corporation doesn't have strong case. But they can outspend the governor if the governor is limited to their personal funds. Do you like that scenario ?

Because I don't. The only way I can see to prevent it is for the state to help pay for the defense. Even in cases where it's likely the corporation can win on the merits.

I'm surprised this isn't being commented on more, it does seem incredibly concerning that a corporation can sue a government official as an individual and not as the office holder! What am I missing?

Why is it concerning?

Government officials are still individual citizens. If their personal and individual actions cause harm to someone why shouldn't they be liable? A person should not be shielded from the consequences of their actions simply because they have a government job. Look at all the problems arising from giving police such immunity.

Of course, as always, the devil is in the details.

Could it be abused? Sure. Abusive lawsuits, or abusive amounts of lawsuits, are a thing. But that can happen regardless of whether or not there are corporations or government officials or private citizens involved or some combination.

[LadyTevar]

DeSantis is fighting for the Trump flavoured Republican vote. Others like Nikki Haley are competing for the not-Trump vote.

I've never even heard of her. Nothing on the news about her.

[bilateralrope]

Why is it concerning?

Government officials are still individual citizens. If their personal and individual actions cause harm to someone why shouldn't they be liable? A person should not be shielded from the consequences of their actions simply because they have a government job. Look at all the problems arising from giving police such immunity.

Of course, as always, the devil is in the details.

Could it be abused? Sure. Abusive lawsuits, or abusive amounts of lawsuits, are a thing. But that can happen regardless of whether or not there are corporations or government officials or private citizens involved or some combination.

The problem comes when a large company sues the individual over actions they took as a government official, even when the company doesn't have a case. Because the company isn't planning to win on the merits of the case, they are planning to win by exhausting whatever money the individual government official is able to spend on the suit.

Government officials shouldn't be immune to a lawsuit over their wrongdoing. But, if the lawsuit came from them doing their job, they deserve to have the case decided on the merits. Not on whoever surrenders because they can't afford to continue fighting.

[Solauren]

The problem with that reasoning is; when people abuse their position of power, they are no longer acting as the office, but as an individual.

DeSantis is abusing his office, therefore he's acting as an individual.

They're suing him for abusing his office, not for doing his job.

I admit, that's a very muddy/gray area.

Fortunately, for Disney, DeSantis's own statement made it very clear his motives are personal.

From https://www.nytimes.com/article/disney- ... antis.html

Republican lawmakers in the state — including Mr. DeSantis, a potential candidate for president in 2024 — seized on Disney’s response. “If Disney wants to pick a fight, they chose the wrong guy,” Mr. DeSantis wrote in a fund-raising email to supporters.

Note - Not 'wrong issue', or 'wrong side', or even 'wrong state', but 'wrong guy'. i.e Mr. DeSantis himself.

For DeSantis, it's personnel fight. Therefore, every action taken under the order of Mr. DeSantis since that statement can be seen as him continuing his personal vendetta using his office.

That's a violation of conflict of interest at the least. At the worse, it's corruption and abuse of power.

[bilateralrope]

The problem with that reasoning is; when people abuse their position of power, they are no longer acting as the office, but as an individual.

DeSantis is abusing his office, therefore he's acting as an individual.

They're suing him for abusing his office, not for doing his job.

I admit, that's a very muddy/gray area.

Whatever rules you try and set for a government stepping up will get into messy situations like this. If you try to write rules to deal with them, you get two complications:
- You need to decide how much you want to risk both people who don't deserve the assistance getting it (eg, DeSantis) and how much you want to risk people who deserve the defense assistance not getting it.
- Someone will need to interpret those rules and make a decision on a case by case basis. Which, in this case, will likely be someone appointed by DeSantis.

So I see Florida stepping in to help defend DeSantis here as an unavoidable consequence of trying to get Florida to help any government official who deserves it.

It's going to come down to what Florida law currently is. Which I don't know.

Fortunately, for Disney, DeSantis's own statement made it very clear his motives are personal.

DeSantis will lose on the merits. Another reason why I'm not too concerned with him getting some assistance.

I also think the plausible outcome least damaging to DeSantis will be one where gets to claim that he only lost because he ran out of money.

[Ralin]

The problem with that reasoning is; when people abuse their position of power, they are no longer acting as the office, but as an individual.

DeSantis is abusing his office, therefore he's acting as an individual.

Deciding whether that's true is part of the point of having a trial in the first place.

[Gandalf]

DeSantis is fighting for the Trump flavoured Republican vote. Others like Nikki Haley are competing for the not-Trump vote.

I've never even heard of her. Nothing on the news about her.

Yeah, she announced a few weeks ago. Her biggest moment I think was calling for a competency test for all candidates over some age, which gets both Biden and Trump.

Realistically at this point it looks like she's running for veep, because I don't see how a campaign can sustain this from now until February without going full cult of personality like Trump.

[bilateralrope]

DeSantis is fighting for the Trump flavoured Republican vote. Others like Nikki Haley are competing for the not-Trump vote.

I've never even heard of her. Nothing on the news about her.

Yeah, she announced a few weeks ago. Her biggest moment I think was calling for a competency test for all candidates over some age, which gets both Biden and Trump.

Realistically at this point it looks like she's running for veep, because I don't see how a campaign can sustain this from now until February without going full cult of personality like Trump.

Isn't it unconstitutional to add extra conditions on who is allowed to run for president ?

Even before we get into the practical complications of who gets to interpret the test results.

[Broomstick]

I've never even heard of her. Nothing on the news about her.

Yeah, she announced a few weeks ago. Her biggest moment I think was calling for a competency test for all candidates over some age, which gets both Biden and Trump.

Realistically at this point it looks like she's running for veep, because I don't see how a campaign can sustain this from now until February without going full cult of personality like Trump.

Isn't it unconstitutional to add extra conditions on who is allowed to run for president ?

Even before we get into the practical complications of who gets to interpret the test results.

Depends on the conditions.

Requiring a candidate to be of a particular religion would be unconstitutional, for example. Determining whether or not a candidate is fit (physically or mentally) may not be. Congress does have the authority to remove the current person who is PotUS, even if they have never done so for both political reasons and structural ones (it's hard to get that many votes).

If all else fails - constitutional amendment. Which isn't quick or easy, either.

I don't think mandating a fitness test would be an insurmountable obstacle, but I think at present there are too many old farts in Congress to get the necessary votes.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

What they failed to do was have a requirement for a candidate to have held public office prior to running for president, which would have kept Trump out of the White House.

[Solauren]

What they failed to do was have a requirement for a candidate to have held public office prior to running for president, which would have kept Trump out of the White House.

You don't think he could have been Mayor somewhere if he'd thought he'd needed to?

[Gandalf]

Indeed. There are towns with dogs and cats as mayors, and given that some positions are appointed as well as seats gerrymandered to absurdity, a political machine could just park him somewhere for a while.

So it's a pretty pointless bar.

[Batman]

The cats and dogs probably were better at the job than Trump would've been.

[Ralin]

What they failed to do was have a requirement for a candidate to have held public office prior to running for president, which would have kept Trump out of the White House.

You don't think he could have been Mayor somewhere if he'd thought he'd needed to?

I doubt Trump's ability to go through that much trouble for long-term payoff.

[Solauren]

Really?
All Trump would have had to do is pick a small town, arrange for a large scale construction project to create jobs, become Mayor, do the minimum time in office, and then resign to run for POTUS. 2 years of effort, max (as most of it would be handled by his underlings)

[Ralin]

Making him subject to all sorts of public records and official conduct laws/regulations for years before embarking on a presidential run that I and a lot of other people still aren't convinced he ever expected to be successful.

[Rogue 9]

Trump pretty clearly ran spur of the moment likely out of vengeance for Obama dunking on him after producing his birth certificate. If he had to fulfill a bunch of requirements first he probably wouldn't have done it.

[Ralin]

Trump pretty clearly ran spur of the moment likely out of vengeance for Obama dunking on him after producing his birth certificate. If he had to fulfill a bunch of requirements first he probably wouldn't have done it.

I thought it was the Sharknado thing.

[Gandalf]

I don't think Trump has ever really said it, but a common thought is that the 2011 White House Correspondent's Dinner was the moment he decided to make a run at it.

They spent the whole night roasting the shit out of him, and Trump 2016 became a crusade against Obama.

[Khaat]

I don't think Trump has ever really said it, but a common thought is that the 2011 White House Correspondent's Dinner was the moment he decided to make a run at it.

They spent the whole night roasting the shit out of him, and Trump 2016 became a crusade against Obama.

It was also the ONLY WAY to shield himself from the prosecutions brewing since losing his dad's fixer. Everyone Trump hired for that position was just as bad at it as Trump is at anything. "All the best people!"

[EnterpriseSovereign]

I don't think Trump has ever really said it, but a common thought is that the 2011 White House Correspondent's Dinner was the moment he decided to make a run at it.

They spent the whole night roasting the shit out of him, and Trump 2016 became a crusade against Obama.

Was that the Comedy Central one that featured Marlee Matlin and Michael Sorrentino? Because he was in way over his head, they spent more time roasting each other than they did Trump.