http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/opinion/...tml?_r=1&hp
QUOTE
Editorial
The Rights of Corporations
Published: September 21, 2009
The question at the heart of one of the biggest Supreme Court cases this year is simple: What constitutional rights should corporations have? To us, as well as many legal scholars, former justices and, indeed, drafters of the Constitution, the answer is that their rights should be quite limited — far less than those of people.
This Supreme Court, the John Roberts court, seems to be having trouble with that. It has been on a campaign to increase corporations’ legal rights — based on the conviction of some conservative justices that businesses are, at least legally, not much different than people.
Now the court is considering what should be a fairly narrow campaign finance case, involving whether Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, had the right to air a slashing movie about Hillary Rodham Clinton during the Democratic primary season. There is a real danger that the case will expand corporations’ rights in ways that would undermine the election system.
...
The Rights of Corporations
Published: September 21, 2009
The question at the heart of one of the biggest Supreme Court cases this year is simple: What constitutional rights should corporations have? To us, as well as many legal scholars, former justices and, indeed, drafters of the Constitution, the answer is that their rights should be quite limited — far less than those of people.
This Supreme Court, the John Roberts court, seems to be having trouble with that. It has been on a campaign to increase corporations’ legal rights — based on the conviction of some conservative justices that businesses are, at least legally, not much different than people.
Now the court is considering what should be a fairly narrow campaign finance case, involving whether Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, had the right to air a slashing movie about Hillary Rodham Clinton during the Democratic primary season. There is a real danger that the case will expand corporations’ rights in ways that would undermine the election system.
...
And if you like your dystopian future in a more entertaining comical fashion, I present to you a The Word segment on The Colbert Report (at about 3:52 onwards):
http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/the-colbe...des/#clip213030
So, what's next, Corporations get the right to bare arms?
Edit: Oh, turns out this isn't the first case like this either:
Source: http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=101608
QUOTE
Hachface says:
Also consider a similar case that never made it to the Supreme Court, Nike v. Kasky ( http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/nike.htm ), in which Nike was going to argue that its press releases and letters to editors denying the use of sweatshop labor were not commercial speech; corporations and businesspeople can be held legally liable for misleading statements in commercial speech, but private citizens enjoy First Amendment protections.
Also consider a similar case that never made it to the Supreme Court, Nike v. Kasky ( http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/nike.htm ), in which Nike was going to argue that its press releases and letters to editors denying the use of sweatshop labor were not commercial speech; corporations and businesspeople can be held legally liable for misleading statements in commercial speech, but private citizens enjoy First Amendment protections.