Winner and Loser of the Week in Florida politics — Week of 9.14.25

It’s another embarrassing loss for Anthony Sabatini, who got the boot this week^[1] from a job he never should’ve been hired for in the first place.

Sabatini has made a name for himself as one of Florida’s most obnoxious conservative firebrands. But it appears it was his poor job performance, not his rhetoric, that got him fired as City Attorney for Treasure Island.

The city officially cut ties with Sabatini, firing him over a mix of absenteeism and what city officials described as damaging legal advice.

The city’s termination letter was blunt: His legal opinions had “created confusion, eroded confidence and damaged our reputation with county partners.”

Ironically, City Commissioner Tammy Vasquez, the MAGA supporting member who pushed for Sabatini to be hired in the first place, was the one this week to make the motion to can him.

Talk about buyer’s remorse.

Sabatini has served in the Legislature, run for Congress, and built his brand on confrontational politics, MAGA talking points and endless fights with both Democrats and Republicans he deems insufficiently conservative.

But this firing reinforces that Sabatini is more interested in headlines than hard work.

And it’s not surprising to us. The week that Treasure Island hired Sabatini, just this past May, we contrasted the city’s position with that of Milton. Milton rejected Sabatini and instead hired GrayRobinson.^[2]

“Treasure Island, meanwhile, went with a guy who was once warned that he could be sanctioned if he didn’t stop filing ridiculous lawsuits against mask mandates. But that’s Sabatini’s whole schtick: appealing to people who get riled up over X posts rather than accomplishing anything of real significance,” we wrote.

“You get the legal representation you deserve.”

Don’t say we didn’t warn you.

Now, it’s onto our weekly game of winners and losers.

Winners

Honorable mention: James Buchanan. Rep. Buchanan solidified his front-runner status this week in the race for Senate District 22 by earning the endorsement of top state Senate GOP leadership.

Senate President Ben Albritton, along with Sens. Jim Boyd and Jay Trumbull, jointly backed Buchanan in a formal statement.

“We are proud to endorse James Buchanan for the Florida Senate and look forward to welcoming his brand of proven, results-driven leadership to the Chamber next Fall,” the lawmakers said.

Buchanan already had a head start. He’s the only candidate currently running in SD 22, the seat being vacated by term-limited Sen. Joe Gruters. And Gruters has already said Buchanan is his preferred successor.

But leadership’s backing gives him more than just visibility. It signals party unity behind him and helps with fundraising, networking and warding off potential challengers.

Geography also works in his favor. The district covers parts of Sarasota County (his home base) and a slice of Manatee County. That gives Buchanan familiarity and name recognition, which, combined with leadership endorsement, make his path to SD 22 much clearer.

All told, this endorsement reinforces what many already believed: Buchanan is the GOP’s pick for SD 22. That may explain why he hasn’t courted a single challenger as of yet.

Almost (but not quite) the biggest winner: Jon Maples. Maples has cleared away a major obstacle on his path to the House District 87 seat, giving him a much stronger shot at the nomination.

The key development: Tracy Caruso, who had launched a bid for the seat, has withdrawn from the as-yet-unscheduled Special Election. Her decision significantly narrows the GOP field, leaving Maples as one of just two Republicans in the race.^[3]

Maples, a Lake Clarke Shores Council member, already had momentum. He picked up a significant endorsement from Rep. Meg Weinberger (“MAGA Meg”) in early September, which signals support from GOP insiders aligned with the more conservative or pro-Trump wing of the party.

That endorsement — along with Caruso’s exit — means Maples is now in a much more favorable position to consolidate Republican support, raise funds and campaign without intraparty division. Real estate agent Gretchen Miller Feng remains in the race, but Maples was already blowing her out of the water in terms of fundraising, and it’s likely that difference will only grow now.

The exit of Caruso also likely ends speculation of a proxy contest in HD 87 between Ron DeSantis-aligned and Donald Trump-aligned forces. Former Rep. Mike Caruso is a longtime DeSantis ally, and the Governor’s camp was expected to back Tracy Caruso in the contest.

With Maples endorsed by Weinberger, aligned publicly with more “America First” conservatives, his path looks clearer. Maples has now moved into what looks like a favorite’s spot.

The biggest winner: Second Amendment advocates. After a three‐Judge panel of the 1st District Court of Appeal declared last week that Florida’s decades-old ban on openly carrying firearms was unconstitutional, Attorney General James Uthmeier swiftly backed the decision and clarified that the court’s ruling applies statewide, effective immediately.

This week, Uthmeier instructed law enforcement agencies and prosecutors not to arrest or prosecute individuals for carrying firearms visibly — declaring that open carry is now “the law of the state.”^[4]

This outcome delivers on long-standing goals of Second Amendment advocates, who have argued that the constitutional right to bear arms includes not only concealed carry but also the right to visibly carry weapons in public, subject to reasonable regulation.

There are important limits that remain: Guns are still prohibited in certain sensitive places (schools, courthouses, certain buildings), businesses and property owners can refuse entry, and the display of weapons in a threatening or reckless manner remains unlawful.

For gun rights supporters, this week’s developments are a clear win following the swift embrace by the Attorney General’s office ensures immediate effect. It also puts pressure on law enforcement to adapt quickly after some local leaders raised questions prior to Uthmeier’s statements.^[5]

The Legislature may still need to revise or “clean up” statutes to align with the ruling. But all told, the Second Amendment movement in Florida scored a significant, concrete victory this week.^[6]

Losers

Dishonorable mention: Alfie Oakes. Naples businessman and outspoken conservative activist Oakes saw another courtroom defeat this week in his long-running battle with the Lee County School District.^[7]

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling against Oakes, rejecting his claims that the District improperly terminated his company’s produce contract in retaliation for his political speech.

Oakes, who owns Oakes Farms and the sprawling Seed to Table market in Collier County, had argued that his vocal criticism of COVID precautions and the Black Lives Matter movement in 2020 led the School District to cancel its business with him. But the appeals court said the evidence didn’t support Oakes’ framing.

Instead, the Judges sided with the District, which maintained it ended the contract because of food safety and compliance concerns, not because of Oakes’ public statements.

At issue was the district’s request for Oakes Farms’ COVID-era safety protocols. According to court filings, the company failed to provide adequate documentation. District representatives said they received incomplete information that officials determined did not meet their requirements. That, the court found, was a sufficient and lawful basis to end the agreement.

The setback is another blow to Oakes, who has carved out a reputation as a combative culture warrior. He has made his Seed to Table store a hub for right-wing political rallies and appearances. But in this case, political clout and a high-profile platform didn’t help him overcome judicial skepticism of his claims.

Almost (but not quite) the biggest loser: Disney. Disney’s ABC division suspended “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” after the late-night host made a joke about conservative reaction to the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The network called the remarks “offensive and insensitive,” and affiliates like Nexstar quickly dropped the program, prompting ABC to halt production.

But instead of containing the controversy, Disney’s decision has fueled it. Unions representing actors, writers and journalists have lined up to condemn the move as censorship. SAG-AFTRA^[8] and the Writers Guild^[9] issued statements warning that punishing Jimmy Kimmel for on-air commentary sets a dangerous precedent, especially under the shadow of political pressure.

Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr, a Donald Trump appointee, had threatened regulatory scrutiny^[10] of ABC — an openly political move to go after a longtime critic of Trump.

Let’s be clear upfront: There have been a lot of jokes and commentary in poor taste following Kirk’s assassination that have gone beyond disagreeing with Kirk’s views. Many of those who crossed the line have been held responsible for trying to dunk on a guy while his family is still processing the loss of a husband and father. And if Kimmel did the same, it would be more than justified and we wouldn’t be writing this entry.

But the reality is that Kimmel’s joke was relatively tame, and Kirk wasn’t even the subject.

Here’s the relevant portion of a joke Kimmel made on his Monday program that seemed to fuel ABC’s decision: “We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.”

Note that this came a day before officials filed charges^[11] in the case, with formal documents giving more insight into a motive.

At worst, Kimmel was sloppy and people have read those comments to say he was painting the accused assassin as a conservative, something that other commentators have tried to do.

But there’s another read, that Kimmel wasn’t explicitly saying the shooter was “one of them” — referring to MAGA supporters — he was instead targeting conservative leaders for rushing^[12] to paint the shooter as something other than MAGA. They clearly were^[13], well before^[14] we had the facts^[15] we do now, which show the shooter did hold anti-conservative viewpoints.

Had Kimmel spoken after we had all of this information, the more damning reading would be easy to prove. There was some info floating out there when Kimmel spoke, but it wasn’t fully verified until the next day. And moreover, it’s not the only reading of his remarks, nor the most likely one if you continue listening to his commentary that night. He appeared to be dunking on the conservative reaction rather than offering definitive remarks about the shooter’s motive.

Rather than make this case defending its host against the outrage, Disney effectively validated the effort to silence him. That’s largely driven by backlash from local stations owned by conservative-leaning companies that quickly sought to capitalize on Kimmel’s vulnerability.

For Florida’s largest employer and one of the world’s most influential entertainment companies, that’s a dangerous signal. This goes beyond branding or affiliate pressure. By bending to threats from politicians, Disney is the latest major media company to censor their own talent to avoid political blowback.

Look, it’s fair to criticize late-night hosts for turning overly political. “The Colbert Report,” featuring Stephen Colbert in character doing improv during interviews, is one of the greatest productions ever put on television. His late night show? Not so much. Sometimes his satire lands, but it’s become predictable. Kimmel is much the same. Some monologues are hits, while others sounded like thinly veiled hit pieces.

If that drove audiences away such that it makes sense to move on, then so be it. But that’s a decision for the market to make. And let’s be crystal clear: That’s not at all what’s happening here.

If a veteran host like Jimmy Kimmel can be sidelined over a weaponized controversy, others in the industry will think twice before taking on powerful figures. And conservatives who gripe about cancel culture only to turn around and cheer this move will be the first to cry foul if a Democratic administration tries something similar.

And let’s not forget the irony of Disney taking swift action here when it was their former CEO’s relative milquetoast criticism of Florida’s “Parental Rights in Education” law that led to a yearslong war with the state of Florida. If there’s any company that should know the repercussions of allowing free speech rights to be trampled, it’s them.

The biggest loser: Pam Bondi. On “The Katie Miller Podcast,” the U.S. Attorney General told listeners the Department of Justice (DOJ) would “absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech.”^[16]

That immediately raised alarms and courted harsh bipartisan criticism for the nation’s top legal officer. Hate speech — however vile — is still protected speech in the U.S. There is no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment.^[17]

Bondi tried to walk it back, later saying she was only referring to “threats of violence.” But that’s a dodge. Threats of violence are already unprotected and prosecutable — they’re not “hate speech.” By reframing after the fact, Bondi exposed that her initial promise to prosecute “hate speech” was either a sloppy mistake or a dangerous signal that the DOJ might conflate offensive speech with criminal conduct. Neither inspires confidence.

Speaking of unwarranted potential prosecutions, Bondi also threatened charges after an Office Depot employee — since fired — allegedly refused to print flyers for a Kirk memorial, saying it amounted to discrimination.^[18]

That’s rich coming from conservatives who have spent years defending the right of businesses to deny service — such as making a wedding cake — on ideological grounds. And again, the position earned Bondi criticism from conservatives.^[19]

Taken together, Bondi’s rhetoric this week was a constitutional mess. The nation’s top law enforcement officer misrepresenting what the First Amendment protects and casually threatening prosecution over private business decisions doesn’t exactly inspire confidence. And it’s especially offensive to the principles conservatives have long supported.

Post Views: 0