Question for you legal types...

[jsbowden]

Now that we've decided that corporations are actual people, can we start prosecuting them and killing them when their stupid policies result in killing either their customers or employees (and said corp. can be shown to have known this was a potential outcome and chose not to mitigate it, because hey, we can't keep our shareholders from earning that extra $0.001 per share, now can we)?

Comments

[haides.livejournal.com]

No, because they're not people. They're just entitled to free speech as they're run by people entitled to said right.

[publius1.livejournal.com]

No; the Supreme Court has, for the past 100 years, treated Corporations as people for legal reasons. Yay for substantive due process. Also, yay for a stray judge's comment becoming stare decisis-level LOTL.

[prince-corwin.livejournal.com]

If by "now," you mean "over a century ago," the answer appears to be yes, provided you can fit the corporation in the gas chamber without harming any individual not listed in the lawsuit.

[voltbang.livejournal.com]

Most of the time it's just a matter of sending them to jail. Which seems like a good idea to me.

Jaimie, as the "owner" of a growing corporation...

[(Anonymous)]

...do I forfeit MY rights as an individual who owns a corporation? At what point do I lose my Freedom of Speech?? What about all of the private business owners who themselves are "corporations"? When did a classification of a business have ANYTHING to do with the ability to render their voice heard?

Remember, our economy is based on Capitalism, and targeting a few large corporations because you disagree with their policies, targets ALL of us. Jamie, as someone who has spent the last 6 years of my life to develop a product, build a company, and achieve a moderate level of success, I resent the premise of your question. My company will probably become a corporate juggernaut in time... and as it is an extension of my person, I would expect (in America) to be able to protect myself (itself), both legally and physically, being entitled to the same freedoms that we are all entitled to under our Founding Documents.

I paid a dear price to develop it, and currently there are many employees and families who depend on it for a living.

Freedom will never be "pretty", it is ugly. People WILL overeat and get fat, Politicians WILL succumb to corruption, doctors WILL misdiagnose ailments, and Corporations WILL err in judgement.

There IS NO Panacea, and restricting Freedom in pursuit of Utopia is death to our Liberty...

It is individuals like myself who have decided to "do the right thing", despite ALL of the obstacles in our way, who provide opportunities for bright minds such as yourself to make your contribution to society... we have a symbiotic relationship. You should be celebrating success instead of denigrating it.

...Think about that, my Friend.

[(Anonymous)]

Give me an example of one corporation whose "actions that will knowingly result in the death of an actual person". No Corporation begins with that as a core value...

I will concede that some DO try to cover their mistakes, and they should be held accountable for their actions... and a proper system of laws and regulation will ensure this.

Your pontification constitutes a broad indictment of Corporate America, a misunderstanding of how laws are applied, and an a microcosm of a larger problem: "populist anger". (...how many times do you hear politicians inciting public anger against industry... BIG oil, BIG, Pharma, BIG Insurance... etc, etc, etc!)

Just because "Corporations have no corporeal presence" does NOT mean they (as an entity) should have no rights. Unalienable RIghts are ESSENTIAL component of a free society... for both individual and corporate entities. It is the power through which Tyranny is held in check.

Think about this... Freedom demands PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. If I ate anything and everything I wanted, I would probably be as big as a house, right? ...but I know better...

There are some people that would look at a morbidly obese person and say to themselves... "there ought to be a way to prevent people from doing that to themselves. We should have laws against that type of behavior... 'cause it's a burden on our society..."

How about restricting one's Right to Free Speech based on political affiliations... Should a member of the Klan be forbidden to express his beliefs? (I say, "no", for he will ensure we all remember that "evil" still exists, lest we forget!)

I could go on & on.

..."FREEDOM IS UGLY", and it demands Personal Responsibility... there is no end to the slippery slope of regulating the general public's behavior. It is simply an assault on Freedom. Laws should not be based on public opinions, rather "principles".

When I started my company, I took major financial risk and personal responsibility in seeing it through to success. Should I not then, be PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE for it if it fails or if it causes damage? (Should I not also be entitled to the rewards?)

Using your logic, entities (both individual & corporate) should only be entitled to Rights only as a person of power (i.e. "politician") sees fit to grant (and yes, I am sure the price is negotiable).

Selective endowment of Rights based on negotiable criteria between two parties is NOT what the Founders intended, or what ANY of our Founding Documents stipulate. We have "Unalienable" Rights, guaranteed by our Constitution, and ensured by our system of Government. They cannot be arbitrarily delegated according to what the general population "feels" at any given time.

As Giao intonated, and the Supreme Court has upheld, Corporations are composed of actual persons. To strip them of the basic Freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution is to enslave them. The Supreme Court HAD to uphold the decision... because once the Constitution no longer applies, corporations (i.e. the people who run it) become enslaved to the "people".

The cynical question you postulated is based in "populism", and represents a tool often wielded by politicians to incite class warfare, and an "us versus them" world-view.

I would rather cease my corporate operations and sail off into the sunset should it become mandatory (through the folly of politics) that my personal business decisions be subject to the whims of public sentiment or the "Tyranny" of elected politicians who offer their "legislation services" to the highest bidder.

NO ONE develops a "for profit" enterprise in order to financially support the general population, yet we are constantly under the threat of them "taking" our profits to "give" them to another group.

That is the genesis of corruption in the corporate/political world.

THAT is Marxism.

THAT is where your anger and rhetorical questions should be focused.

Individual Liberty doesn't exist in a Utopian Society.