- [Announcer] This is a production of WEDU PBS, Tampa, St. Petersburg, Sarasota.

(bright music) - Coming up next, a judge dismisses Disney's lawsuit against the governor, over the state takeover of the theme parks district.

The ousted Hillsborough State Attorney argues the judge should quickly decide on whether or not he should be reinstated.

There are calls for Florida to join other states in asking for a brand-new constitutional convention.

And transgender people must now put their original sex at birth on their state driver's licenses.

All this and more right now on "Florida This Week."

(bright inspiring music) Welcome back.

Joining us on the panel this week, Deborah Tamargo is the past president of the Florida Federation of Republican Women.

Tara Newsom is an attorney and political science professor at St. Petersburg College.

Hunter Branstner is the vice president of the Polk County Young Republicans, and host of the Red Print Podcast.

And Howard Simon is the Interim Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida.

So nice to see you all.

- Good to see you.

- Thanks for having me.

- Thank you for doing the program.

Well, this week a federal judge dismissed Disney's free speech lawsuit against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, dealing a setback to the company's hopes of regaining control of the district that governs Walt Disney World after it was taken over by the governor's appointees.

(wind zaps) The judge said in his decision that Disney lacked standing in its First Amendment lawsuit against the governor.

The judge also said Disney has not alleged any specific injury to the company from any action taken by the new board.

Disney quickly appealed the decision on Thursday.

A separate lawsuit over who controls the district is still pending in state court.

The legal battle was a direct outgrowth of Disney's decision to criticize Florida's Parental Rights in Education Bill that banned classroom instruction about sexual orientation and gender identity.

So, Deborah, the governor said, he declared victory, said, "We were wrong"... "We were right, and they were wrong," excuse me, and that Disney should move on.

So, what do you think about the judge's decision?

- Absolutely a good decision.

This was never about the First Amendment, never about free speech.

They have their free speech intact.

This was always about the districts.

Districts, independent-taxing districts are formed by the legislature, they're in the statute.

They had not been filing reports, so forth and so on, or complying with various provisions of the statute.

I said it on this show a number of months ago when this lawsuit started, is that it was a red flag to look at these special districts and find that more than a handful were not in compliance.

So the state began looking, requiring reports, and so forth and so on, dissolving some that were no longer performing to their purpose.

And so this was not, but it was a red flag.

You need to be careful when you speak, that people may look into the fact that, "Oh, you're a felon," or, "Oh, you haven't paid your taxes."

So, so forth and so on.

Never about free speech.

There was no harm to the fact that they spoke or they tried to pressure- - Tara, what you say?

Was this retaliation for Disney's position on Don't Say Gay?

- Well, the court never got to the question of the First Amendment.

It's ironic because we see that a big part of the Republican party's beating their chest about the weaponization of the judicial system, when Judge Winsor, who's a Trump appointee, didn't even get to the merits of the First Amendment.

He actually dismissed on standing, saying that Disney didn't have standing to bring the case, which we know is bunk.

It's political cover, because we know that corporations have the right for political speech.

So, what's really at the issue here is that we'll never really get to whether or not Disney was hurt, until we go to the appellate court.

And the other thing that's really interesting is those 1,800 districts that we're talking about, they all enjoy the same rights that Disney did.

The difference is Disney's a corporate giant, a family-friendly, inclusive, corporate giant, that had a different view of what family and inclusion looks like than DeSantis.

And so the other districts like The Villages, which is a special district, also vote predominantly Republican.

So this doesn't look quite as easy- - So you're saying- - As Deborah is talking.

- The governor didn't take action against those other districts?

- No, no.

And we won't get to the retaliation until the appellate court.

- Mm-hmm.

- That's incorrect.

The governor and the legislature has taken action against special districts that are not compliant.

Disney was not compliant- - That wasn't the question before the court there, the question before the court is whether it was retaliation against free speech.

- It was not.

- Let's bring Howard Troxler.

And Howard, what's your take on this?

Or I called you Howard Troxler, Howard Simon, I'm sorry.

- (chuckles) Well, That's okay.

Howard Troxler is a wonderful person.

I'm honored to be confused by him.

Look, to say that this is not a free speech case is gotta be news to the real world.

I would wait until...

I put my money on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals sending it back for some more legal work by this judge.

Yes, special taxing districts need to be looked into.

But this is the only one that's been looked into and it's the only one that's been looked into specifically because they criticized the governor's policy.

If this isn't a free speech case, I don't know what is a free speech case.

And I've been dancing around free speech cases for four decades.

I mean, of course this is retaliation for criticizing the Governor.

- Hunter.

- Yeah, a big part of this is also whether or not there was intent to do damage to the company, and they couldn't find that.

They weren't gonna look into it, first of all, because there's no standing in it, there's no grounds in it.

It's not really a free speech issue.

Anyone who marks it as a free speech issue, I think is being a little bit disingenuous on the topic.

The company has a right to have their opinion.

They made their statement.

However, like Deborah said, people are gonna start looking when you start saying things that are obviously conflated or obviously gonna be conflictive.

- That's what exactly makes it a free speech case.

- But if you're gonna argue free speech, if you're gonna argue free speech- - When you are retaliated against for expressing your opinion, that's what makes it a free speech case.

- But the problem is, for there to be an infringement on the free speech, there has to be some form of damage, but there was no form of damage to the company.

- The court didn't even get to that question in reality.

- But that's the whole point.

- But the truth is that Floridians are having to pay for this appeal at $800 an hour.

And so the expense of this litigation- - So it's great that they threw it out actually.

So that means- - Well, no, because- - We're saving money.

(Hunter and Deborah laugh) - DeSantis has doubled down and saying he's going all the way.

So, at the cost of tax dollars, we're gonna wait to see what the appellate court says.

- Disney is challenging the decision and taking it higher.

Okay.

Well, in a conference call with reporters this week, Florida Democratic party chair, Nikki Fried, said she wants ousted Hillsborough state attorney Andrew Warren, to be reinstated and then jump into the race for that office again.

(wind zaps) Democrats want a federal judge to return Warren to the office he was elected to.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this month that Warren was unjustly removed from office for voicing his opinions on public policy.

- We look forward to getting back to the district court to get the relief that has been denied for 18 months to me, to the voters in Hillsborough County, and to everyone who believes that no one is above the law, not even the governor.

- The Appeals Court said a federal judge in Tallahassee has the power to reinstate Warren.

Governor DeSantis removed Warren from his elected position and is now asking all members of the appeals court in Atlanta to hear the case.

And Tara, does Andrew Warren have any power to compel the judge to make a decision in his favor or to- - You know, Nikki Fried might've been stirring the political pot with this, right?

And it's important to note though, even if she was doing that, that if the governor does not reinstate Andrew Warren, it'll be twice that he's denied the voters of Hillsborough County the right of the representation through their vote.

But what's really interesting is this, he's doing nothing but advancing Andrew Warren.

He looks like a champion of democracy and ally of civil liberties.

And whether he runs for his old seat or any other seat in the state, he's in a great position.

- Hmm.

What do you think about this dispute?

I mean- - Again, I do not see it as free speech.

If Andrew Warren wanted to talk politics, which he has since he was elected, you go outside of the building.

That was the law when I was in the legislature, it's still the law today, that if you want to accept contributions, talk politics, you do it outside on your own time.

What he did- - But the rule of law says that he should be reinstated.

- But what he did- - So it doesn't matter- - What he did was put it on stationary from the state attorney's office, that.

And from day one, when he was elected the first time, he put it on stationary that he was not going to enforce certain laws, that made us less safe.

Again, with this issue, he put it on stationary.

He was warned by his own advisors in the office not to do that, to take his political ideology outside, not inside.

So again, he was telling his people not to prosecute certain new laws, what I have more against him than anything else.

So again, free speech, we cannot go to our employers and speak- - But Deborah, the appellate court has already decided against him.

- Court has already decided.

- Well, it's still got a ways to go- - It's a conservative court.

- It has a ways to go.

And he has not been reinstated.

And he's been, to me, breaking the law since day one of taking the office.

And I've seen those letters he sent out with those crimes, which- - But that was not part of the finding of the court.

- Well, it's not.

But I'm saying he has politicized that office from day one.

- Let's bring Hunter in.

Hunter, what you say?

- I was gonna say it's more of the broader issue of if we went to any other employer, if I went into my employer and I said, you know, "Here's your policy, this is what you want us to do, this is what you're supposed to be doing," which is the law, which is what he's supposed to be following, supposed to be prosecuting.

If I send out a company email saying, "I'm not gonna follow these policies."

- Yeah.

- When I go to work, if I'm not fired the next day- - Yeah.

- Or in the office, talking about suspensions or something.

I would be surprised.

I think most people would be surprised.

And this is essentially what he did here.

He went and pledged, signed a pledge saying he wasn't gonna prosecute certain laws.

You know, you have to start looking at it and going, any other employer would've done the exact same thing.

You can't have somebody in there who's gonna overtly disobey the fact that they're supposed to be doing a certain duty in a certain job.

- Howard, is that the way you see it?

That he had disagreed with the law and he should be fired?

- (chuckles) Prosecutors, state attorneys, are constitutional officers that are charged with exercising their discretion as to what to prosecute as a high-priority crime and a low-priority crime.

He's charged with exercising his discretion.

But Rob, I wanna say there's somebody that's left out of this discussion.

This isn't just a fight between Governor DeSantis and Andrew Warren.

We're leaving out the voters.

If there was ever a case of voter suppression, boy, this was it.

The voters have voted twice for the person that they want to be the chief law enforcement officer of their county.

The governor doesn't like Andrew Warren's policies, or his prioritization of what to prosecute, but that choice of that policy disagreement should be left to the voters.

That's what democracy is all about.

That's what elections are for.

If the governor doesn't like Andrew Warren's policies as a prosecutor, he should campaign against him when he runs for reelection, not remove him like some authoritarian dictator.

- Well, let's- - Agreed.

- If we wanna talk about voters then, then the voters have also put in their backing behind representatives who've changed state law to put in legal procedures and make sure that prosecutors go and follow the law.

They're supposed to go and prosecute the crimes and laws that we, as voters, voting those representatives to go and make.

So if you're gonna go in there and say, "Well, let's talk about voters."

Well, you're ignoring all the voters who went ahead and said, "We disagree with the fact that you're going in and clearly putting your personal bias forward and ignoring the fact that you're supposed to prosecute these crimes."

- Well, he was elected- - And- - He was elected in a district though that had incumbent.

So I think the voters were in full support of Andrew Warren.

- You ignoring the rest of... You're ignoring the whole state law.

- Well- - And final statement.

He did not campaign on the basis of, had he told the voters, "I'm going to get in office in day one, I'm going to send a memo not to prosecute certain laws and then continue to do that where the sheriffs- - Cherry picking- - In the state of Florida- - That's exactly what- - Found he made those letters.

- You're cherry picking this history too right now.

- Absolutely.

- Let's bring Howard Troxler, I (laughs)... Howard Simon in for the last word.

Howard.

- You know, the argument that the governor makes, that he was neglectful of his duty, would be a...

Which was been made here again, would be a credible argument if there was ever a case in front of him that should have been prosecuted that wasn't prosecuted.

He'd never even had a case.

The governor did this as a political gesture to enhance his bonafides as a anti-woke governor.

But there was never a case that was brought to Andrew Warren where he had to make a decision where it could even be argued that he neglected his duty.

- Our connection was lost with Howard Simon and we weren't able to reconnect.

So we apologize and we will invite him back to a future show.

Well, this week, governor DeSantis said he wants the Republican-controlled state legislature to okay a slate of amendments to the US Constitution that include congressional term limits and requiring a balanced federal budget.

(wind zaps) He also wants a new constitutional convention to consider revising the nation's founding document.

The last constitutional convention was held in 1787.

- The Florida Legislature is gonna be certifying a series of amendments, constitutional reforms, under Article Five of the Constitution, that will reign Washington in, and that will hold Washington accountable.

- 28 states have already signed on to the idea of holding a brand-new constitutional convention.

Only six more states are needed to make it happen.

So, Hunter, do we need a new constitutional convention?

- I think it's a really interesting way of going about things, and I think it's gonna create a new form of ways for states to actually keep the federal government accountable, especially after seeing what the federal government is doing with Texas.

I see the convention allowing us as states and as a people to be able to go and stand up to the federal government and keep powers to the people.

I mean, this is mainly just talking about term limits.

Well, at least for what DeSantis is pushing, is term limits, a balanced budget, line-item vetoes, an equal law for public in Congress.

Term limits is something that has been going up and down Congress for decades, and it never gets passed because it's a conflict of interest for those who wanna be career politicians.

One of the main issues, especially on the youth side, is we talk about age, and age has always been a problem in the sense of why do we have, for example, the two presidential candidates, they're both above 75.

A lot of the youth and majority of the country is wondering, "Are we supposed to be continued being led by people who are in their seventies?"

And it's a concern.

So now you have someone going in and saying, "Hey, term limits.

You can't be in here forever and continue to impose forever."

They don't believe in the Nancy Pelosi doctrines, the Maxine Waters doctrines, the Mitch McConnell doctrines, where they're there for decades and decades and decades.

- Article Five in the US Constitution governs the amendment process.

There's seven articles, 27 amendments.

Article Five tells us the two formal ways of amending the Constitution, the informal way, of course, is the Supreme Court.

Now, yes, 28 states have said "We want a constitutional convention."

But 23 are Democrats, and 11 states are up in 2024.

So the probable path of this second formal way of amending is not great.

But the other real danger is that we may need to deal with term limits.

We may need to deal with things that the voters wanna, to look at.

But Article Five of the US Constitution is silent to the rules of how a constitutional convention can go.

So the minute that you call one, and we actually have enough states, you need 34 states to get it.

You then open it up to the radicals of both parties.

And that is a very problematic issue because there's no governing authority to tell the constitutional convention to stop.

And it affords a very vulnerable Constitution where we have our civil liberties protected, to a place where you might have individuals making decisions that were never intended.

- A dangerous can of worms.

- Very dangerous.

- You're saying?

- Yes.

- But see, that's the thing right there, that we're arguing about whether or not, how it should be governed, versus whether it should exist or whether it should go.

Two totally different issues.

The fact of the matter is this gives another way for the states and the peoples of the states to not be- - Okay.

Deborah, what's your take?

Good idea?

- Well, the National Federation of Republican Women, Florida Federation, for a long time we've looked at, perhaps a single issue, but once you throw a myriad of issues in it, you're going to create chaos.

So, we were for a single issue, maybe the Keep Nine, so that we don't dilute and have all these, you know, politicization of the Supreme Court.

- And not a rewrite of the whole Constitution.

- Not rewrite.

- Yeah.

- No.

- Okay, well, in a move that affects the transgender community, Floridians can no longer elect to update or change their gender on Florida's driver's licenses, according to a memo sent to state officials by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.

(wind zaps) The memo says previous policies that allowed residents to elect to change their gender are not supported by statutory authority.

According to the memo, existing statutes dictate that Florida's Department of Motor Vehicles can only issue a replacement license when a license or permit is lost, stolen, or when there is a subsequent change in the licensee's name, address, or restrictions.

The memo further says that someone misrepresenting their gender, meaning not using their sex assigned at birth, constitutes both criminal and civil fraud.

Civil rights groups say the new license policy is the latest example of targeted attacks against transgender residents in the state, which has seen new restrictions in recent years on access to gender-affirming care and access to bathrooms.

- Since we're leaning on the Constitution today, let's just start there, and then I hope that my friends at the table can add to this.

The US Constitution's preamble, the very last portion of it, is "To secure the blessings of Liberty," with the Constitution.

And we certainly hope that states will do that too.

I'm not sure that our LGBTQ friends are securing the blessings of Liberty when the gender of their heart is being denied on a government ID.

But the practical aspect of this is how do we enforce it?

What will this mean to the relationship between our very tender, marginalized community of LGBTQ, and the police?

When we already have issues in our community of trying to create inclusivity and support for one another.

So I think we really have to look at this and what is the intent, what will be the impact, and what does it really mean about liberties?

And to just pull in the constitution one more time.

You know, the Ninth Amendment says that the framers intended that there were other liberties that should be protected.

It actually says the enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights should not deny and disparage those held by the people.

They may not have been able to foresee the liberty of LGBTQ.

They certainly weren't the most inclusive bunch.

But the spirit of the democracy, the spirit of natural law, the spirit of unalienable rights, means that our friends in the LGBTQ community, our families, the ones that we love, and our neighbors, should be protected just like anybody else.

- Hunter, what's your take?

- I don't really even see this as much of a big issue in the grand scheme of things.

I think this is more of, like you said earlier, it's kind of stirring-the-pot-topic.

If we really look at it here, the cards themselves just say sex.

And we always hear from the LGBT community, "Sex and gender are separate."

So why is it now that they're trying to make gender equal to sex on the cards?

It's purely based on a, on the biological part, we are a man or a woman.

This is your card, this is how the government IDs you.

- For somebody who's made a transition- - Okay.

- From a woman to a man.

- Okay.

- Now has a beard, and they're pulled over by the police, and the police look at the man with a beard and say, "It says here you're a woman, but you look like a man."

So, doesn't that present a host of problems?

- Well, no.

In and of itself, wouldn't that tie into exactly what the LGBT community is saying, which is, "My gender is not tied to my biological sex"?

- But contextualize it with all the other culture wars that are going on in the state of Florida, and you might have a hostile situation for our friends that deserve the protection of the laws.

- You wanna talk about hostility?

Let's say for example, there's a car wreck, someone gets assaulted.

You know, we're talking about safety issues here.

Medical concerns.

If someone says on their ID that they're a male and they give them too much, let's say, morphine or something, and they...

I don't really understand how the medicine works and I'm just, you know, a regular guy, but they administer too much because it's not for the right sex, what happens then?

- I trust our healthcare providers.

- Well, here's my question to that.

If you just trust their healthcare providers, if you just trust they're gonna do their job, what happens when someone makes a mistake?

Are you gonna hold them because they made the mistake?

- It's a fool's errand.

- We're almost out of time.

Before we go, what other news stories should we be paying attention to?

Deborah, your other big story of the week.

- Okay, my big story of the week.

We have elections coming up this year, 2024, not just national elections.

I know a lot of people feel somewhat helpless that their vote doesn't count in a national election.

But think about locally, think about your roads, think about how horrible the roads are in the city of Tampa.

Think about how nasty the roads are in Pasco County.

Think about those issues that you can impact.

We are a representative government.

That means you elect your representatives on an ideology and so you do have an impact.

They're the closest to home.

So get involved in your local issues.

If you want better roads, if you want cleaner communities, a better lifestyle, get involved.

You can make a difference.

- All right, Tara, your other big story of the week.

- This week, university system Chancellor Ray Rodriguez issued an emergency order to allow for students in other states to come to Florida, to our colleges and our universities, and to waive tuition, out-of-state tuition fees, deadlines, if they can demonstrate that they have had religious persecution.

And what I'm really watching, and I think the story to watch is what will the impact be on Florida's colleges and universities when we have multiple kinds of faith groups coming to our institutions, and whether that was the true intent of that emergency order.

- All right.

And Hunter, your big story.

- I was actually just gonna echo a little bit what she said.

Pay attention to your local, your local elections.

This year matters a lot because Florida got hundreds of thousands of people in the past couple of years.

Your counties are blowing up.

Infrastructure is needed, education is needed.

You have to focus on those topics.

And if you're not paying attention to the local elections, you're gonna be hurting yourself and the people around you because this stuff matters, you know?

And as someone who's under 30, this stuff matters to me 'cause this is gonna affect my generation and you know, when I have kids in the next couple years, is gonna directly impact them because of these people making the laws and making the changes.

So, focus up on that.

- All right, well, thanks to Deborah Tamargo- - Thank you.

- Tara Newsom and Hunter Branstner.

And we apologize to Howard Simon, we lost him.

- Aw.

- We gotta get Howard back.

And thank you for joining us.

Send us your comments at ftw@wedu.org, and like us on Facebook.

You can view this and past shows online at wedu.org, or on the PBS app.

And "Florida This Week" is now available as a podcast.

And from all of us here at WEDU, have a great weekend.

(bright inspiring music) (bright music) (bright music fades)