Just because a legislature puts an expenditure in a bill doesn't make it a law or a binding precedent.
And it certainly doesn't guarantee that it is well thought out, appropriate, legal, legitimate or constitutional.
Don't forget that the governor does have the constitutional authority to veto.
And the legislature has the constitutional right to over-ride a specific veto if they can muster the support.
Furthermore, if one of the parties believes a veto is unconstitutional they can appeal it to the courts on that basis.
Checks and balances, checks and balances.....
.
No it does not. The governor has to sign it or he can veto it.
Don't forget that the governor does have the constitutional authority to veto.
And his stated reason for vetoing it is the issue at hand. Had he just vetoed it or said he was vetoing it because he disagreed with public funds subsidizing sports facilities then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Instead, he has said that he will veto it solely because the Rays exercised their constitutional right to comment on a current issue which annoyed DeSantis. He he violating their First Amendment rights by retaliating. Courts are not going to like that.
Furthermore, if one of the parties believes a veto is unconstitutional they can appeal it to the courts on that basis.
It certainly could be, but my expectation is that the money will quietly be put back in the budget just as soon as the mid-terms are over, DeSantis is reelected, and he no longer needs the campaign headline.