Corporations are People?

[Bomb#20]

That's nowhere near anything I said.

Maybe I misunderstood. This is a Citizens United thread; so I took you to be arguing in support of the contention that CU was wrongly decided and that the FEC wasn't violating the constitution when it suppressed Hillary: The Movie. Weren't you? Were you taking issue only with the specific way Lumpy formulated his argument?

People are allowed to lie. Corporations not so much. By not allowing a corporation to lie to its customers or shareholders is that a violation of the constitution?

I don't know -- I'm not an expert on corporation law. I do know that business people are not allowed to cheat their customers or their business partners or their employers, regardless of whether they're incorporated or not. Can you give a specific example of a lie that's illegal for a person to tell in the course of operating a business only if the government construes the lie as "corporate speech"?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Extremely poor analogy.

Why is it a poor analogy?

A corporation is specifically a legally recognized entity on paper that is a vessel for conducting business. It comes with a whole lot of rules and regulations. Corporations come with very nice privileges such as how bankruptcy and liability are managed independently of workers/owners (so Diebold lawsuits).

A computer a possession that isn't freely searched without a warrant.

A corporation does not have a mind.
Please cite the part of the Constitution that says the government can make a human being's constitutional rights go poof by ascribing his actions to the tool he's using.

WOW! That is particularly weak.

Unlike computers (a possession, not a "tool"), corporations are not in the Bill of Rights. The legal code invented corporations and governments can apply whatever the rights, privileges, etc... it wants on them.

A person can express thoughts. A computer (not there yet) and a corporation can not, one is an electronic device, the other is a convergence of business and tax regulations. Neither of these things can EXPRESS themselves (robots are going to get there and we'll actually need to address that down the road), but corporations would merely be expressing the thoughts of its board or owners via the board or its owners. Who are very free to do so on their own. There is no reason to pretend a corporation can speak for itself or express itself or have an implied shield to let their owners do so under the guise of the corporation.

 

[ZiprHead]

That's nowhere near anything I said.

Maybe I misunderstood. This is a Citizens United thread; so I took you to be arguing in support of the contention that CU was wrongly decided and that the FEC wasn't violating the constitution when it suppressed Hillary: The Movie. Weren't you? Were you taking issue only with the specific way Lumpy formulated his argument?

I've already said in this thread that Hillary: The Movie wasn't the major problem with CU. It's that corporations can now involve themselves in our elections.

People are allowed to lie. Corporations not so much. By not allowing a corporation to lie to its customers or shareholders is that a violation of the constitution?

I don't know -- I'm not an expert on corporation law. I do know that business people are not allowed to cheat their customers or their business partners or their employers, regardless of whether they're incorporated or not. Can you give a specific example of a lie that's illegal for a person to tell in the course of operating a business only if the government construes the lie as "corporate speech"?

Sorry. I'm not going to follow you down another of your stupid rabbit holes.

 

[unapologetic]

Hawaii found a way around Citizens United.


See Also

Post in thread 'Corporations are People?'

May 18, 2026

• ZiprHead

• 

 

[ZiprHead]

Hawaii found a way around Citizens United.

I posted one on the previous page about Montana doing the same thing.