Skip to main content

View Diary: Yes, even liberals can internalize the NRA's paranoid rhetoric (316 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  askyron - the SCOTUS has never declared that (0+ / 0-)

    corporations are people. What they have ruled is that corporations have some of the same rights as "human persons". Those cases can be overturned, although the rights of corporations go back more than 100 years and there are now hundreds of laws, cases, rules and regulations at the federal and state level that have incorporated elements of corporate personhood. No one ruling, even from the SCOTUS, would change it all. State laws would likely survive anything done at the federal level.  

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Sun Apr 27, 2014 at 09:16:16 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  It was Mitt Romney who said (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LilithGardener

      "corporations are people too." But I think you're splitting hairs here. Citizens United basically gives corporations the rights of personhood through deregulated rights to contribute money, in a twisted claim to bow to "free speech" as opposed to the bow to monied power interests that it really is.

      No matter how you slice it, that ruling is rooted in the idea that
      "corporations are people too." Although fair to say not enough human to be punished for their misdeeds as monolithically as they are granted privileges.

      The "rights of corporations" are one thing, redefining them as individual speech in terms of contributions is an entirely bigger, different thing.

      "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

      by StellaRay on Mon Apr 28, 2014 at 07:27:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Stella - I expected more from an honors graduate (4+ / 0-)

        of Harvard Law School, although Romney never actually practiced law. Romney was wrong.

        Even in Citizens United the SCOTUS made very clear distinction between "human persons" and groups of people like clubs, unions, and corporations.

        One of the clear distinctions is that corporations cannot make campaign contributions to candidates for federal office, The Tillman Act of 1907 makes them illegal. I just wrote a diary about it last week. You can read it here:

        http://www.dailykos.com/...

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Mon Apr 28, 2014 at 08:45:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Interesting. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LilithGardener, VClib

          Thanks for linking me to your diary. This is good news that should have gotten more play.

          Would you mind putting into words what you think Citizens United DOES allow corporations that was not allowed before CU?

          "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

          by StellaRay on Mon Apr 28, 2014 at 09:56:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  CU allows corporations to engage in political (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            StellaRay

            activity through third parties, rather than directly. This makes independent expenditures easier because the corporations just need to send checks. It also allows corporations, by using some specific types of entities as their pipeline, to fund independent expenditures without any disclosure thereby keep their political activity under the radar. That's why the Dems are so eager to pass something like the Disclose Act, to make certain that all corporate political activity is transparent.

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Mon Apr 28, 2014 at 10:22:39 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Agreed. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              VClib

              So I come back to my point. The spirit of CU is that corporations have rights of personhood couched under "freedom of speech" that they did not have before to this extent, and I think it's correct to phrase it this way, regardless of the language of the decision.  

              Also, some states have quite strong transparency laws now, such as here in Minnesota. But yes, there is definitely the need for this to be a federal/national goal as opposed to up to the states, imo.

              "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

              by StellaRay on Mon Apr 28, 2014 at 12:53:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site