Supreme Court may hear challenge to corporate personhood

[Surf314]

http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comment...lenged_in/

This a pretty biased article posted to reddit I think by one of the lawyers representing this case, but if the supreme court hears it it will be pretty damn significant. Corporate personhood has been considered de facto true for years now and has effected many laws and regulations. This case specifically is about corporate rights of free speech and political speech that is guaranteed by the bill of rights if corporate personhood is true.

So simple version is: In the USA we consider corporations to be like fake people, and therefore are protected by the Bill of Rights. What do you think about this?

[CaffeinePowered]

So simple version is: In the USA we consider corporations to be like fake people, and therefore are protected by the Bill of Rights. What do you think about this?

I do not believe they should be considered as such. I'm not well versed in law, but it makes sense at least for liability and other types of law to treat a corporation as a person. However I don't think the bill of rights or any amendment in that regard should apply to them.

A public corporation, in theory, is beholden to the will of its shareholders, lets say hypothetically 100% of shareholders are in favor of government issue X. Why do they need to use the corporation as a proxy, they could as citizens, go out and lobby for issues X on their own. Even in a private corporation, the person(s) who own it could exercise their own rights without a need to use the company as a proxy.

But the reality is that in any company all shareholders are not going to agree, if there's a 51/49 split, all of the corporations resources will go toward supporting/rejecting issue X, using the money that is due to all 100% of its owners, despite the 51/49 split. While I suppose the argument could be made that the 49% could sell their shares and invest elsewhere, have we ever seen evidence of this happening?

[Benito Mussolini]

So simple version is: In the USA we consider corporations to be like fake people, and therefore are protected by the Bill of Rights. What do you think about this?

Then, shouldn't they respect that Bill of Rights themself?

I don't want to look for any proof, as I don't know where to look for them (and because I am too lazy), but I guess some don't respect the First and the Fourth Amendment, right?
I don't know about US history that much, so I'd believe anyone that tells me them Amendments are respected all the times, given proper arguments.

[Badgerman of DOOM]

[quote author=Surf314 link=topic=3513.msg108510#msg108510 date=1251119711]
So simple version is: In the USA we consider corporations to be like fake people, and therefore are protected by the Bill of Rights. What do you think about this?

Then, shouldn't they respect that Bill of Rights themself?

I don't want to look for any proof, as I don't know where to look for them (and because I am too lazy), but I guess some don't respect the First and the Fourth Amendment, right?
I don't know about US history that much, so I'd believe anyone that tells me them Amendments are respected all the times, given proper arguments.
[/quote]

You'd also think the president would do his job at all times (I'M LOOKING AT YOU JACKSON)

[[fr31ns]Karrde]

I really hope this strikes down coporate personhood, which is part of what is letting the coporations lock our government down.  Money = free speech, thefore they can do what they want wiht it atm.

[Surf314]

Karrde hit it on the head, thier right of free speech basically amounts to their right to funnel lots of money to candidates.