Skip to main content

View Diary: Ending corporate personhood via a Constitutional Amendment: we are on our way. (58 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  We agree and disagree (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bob B, Geekesque, AlanF, Sunspots, CTPatriot

    I agree with you that money does not equal speech and that the US Supreme Court's 1976 ruling in Buckley v. Valeo should also be overturned.  Senator Udall's amendment effectively would do that.

    But we also must address the dangerous doctrine of corporate personhood.  Congressman McGovern's amendment -- the People's Rights Amendment -- makes clear that freedom of the press remains protected.  The courts have never really addressed that guarantee apart from freedom of speech and they will need to do so after the enactment of this amendment.  All of the rights that people have remain protected under this amendment, including the rights of shareholders to bring a takings claim against the government for unconstitutional seizure of property.

    •  How is corporate personhood 'dangerous?' (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      McGovern's amendment would destroy the right of people to sue corporations.

      You can't sue a non-person in court.  Under his amendment, suing AT&T would be like suing a tree or a dog.

      It would also mean that any business entity would be unable to enter into contracts or hire employees.

      Because, you can't have a contract between a non-person and person.

      Sorry, but this is extremely ill-conceived.

      "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

      by Geekesque on Tue Nov 22, 2011 at 09:28:26 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Supreme Court has said we can't sue AT&T (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        for wiretapping without a warrant.

        •  It's a bit more complicated than that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          IIRC, they ruled on an issue of standing.

          Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

          by Robobagpiper on Tue Nov 22, 2011 at 10:09:30 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  How about the corporation (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          that poisons your drinking water?

          "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

          by Geekesque on Tue Nov 22, 2011 at 10:16:43 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's almost exactly the problem. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            chuckvw, Sunspots, CTPatriot

            Courts have ruled, based on the ludicrous idea of corporate personhood, that state governments can't pass laws requiring that the presence of BGH in milk be labeled.  Not so different from poisons in our drinking water, really.

            And as Congressman McGovern points out in the video, the recent move by courts to block public health warning from cigarette boxes also rests on this corporate personhood fiction.

            Poison again.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site