[droberts]

The article is actually on commondreams.org, but FR does not allow commondreams.org articles for some reason (why not?). However, the commondreams.org article is just a review of a book which can be found on Amazon. For the commondreams article, you can go here

Would rather hear what people thought about the book as opposed to commondreams.org.

[The Obstinate Insomniac]

Good post, is commondreams.org a socialist anti-corporation group?

[per loin]

The fundamental idea behind corporations was the protection of the assets of wealthy individuals from responsibility for the corporation's actions. A corporation could lie, cheat, steal, and kill, while wealthy individuals lived, protected from having to bear the consequences of their money's actions. From such nefarious beginnings, corporations have grown into that great game of gambling, the stock exchanges, and along the way have developed into the dominant, if inorganic, lifeform in our civilization. Whether or not, humans are necessary to the long term life of corporations is an open question.

[Billy_bob_bob]

This article makes a very big claim. Are there any legal types out there who can look into this? Is this claim concerning Santa Clara County v. the Southern Pacific Railroad valid? If so, what are the ramifications, if any?

[inquest]

I'm not opposed to the undoing of corporate personhood. Corporations may be conducive to economic growth, but they're also conducive to a back-door style of socialism.

[JZoback]

If Davis knew his headnote was legally sterile, though, we can only speculate about his tactics. Perhaps he thought judges in the future would read his headnote as if it could serve as legal precedent, and would thereafter invoke corporate personhood in rendering court decisions.

That's all a moot point now. A headnote will not change our current corporate legal standings.

There have other cases where corporate personhood has been established.

The cat is out of the bag so to speak, getting it back in won't happen.

Corporate corruption needs to be addressed legislatively rather than judiciously.

Nice HEAVY fines normally do the trick

[boris]

"What is “corporate personhood?” Suppose, to keep Wal-Mart at bay, your county commissioners enact an ordinance prohibiting Wal-Mart from doing business in your county. The subsequent (and immediate) lawsuit would be a slam-dunk for Wal-Mart’s lawyers, because this corporation enjoys—just as you and I do as living, breathing citizens—the Constitutional rights of “due process” and “equal protection.” Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. is a person, not in fact, not in flesh, not in any tangible form, but in law."

Well that certainly helped "Big Tobacco" keep its first-amendment rights, didn't it? As in television commercials, billboards, Joe Camel, etc.

--Boris