The corporate chokehold on life in America--our culture, our economy, our democracy--is THE story of the times, and corporate personhood is the Achilles heel, the target for a lethal injection.
Since its decision on Santa Clara County the Supreme Court is singularly responsible for the hegemonic role of corporations, as Thom was first …
The corporate chokehold on life in America--our culture, our economy, our democracy--is THE story of the times, and corporate personhood is the Achilles heel, the target for a lethal injection.
Since its decision on Santa Clara County the Supreme Court is singularly responsible for the hegemonic role of corporations, as Thom was first to point out in UnEqual Protection.
Historically, the Court was dead-right-spot-on about corporate personhood. In 1809, in Hope Insurance Co. v. Boardman, the Court said, "...a body corporate as such cannot be a citizen within the meaning of the Constitution." In 1839, in Bank of Augusta v. Earle, the Court held, "The only rights [a corporation] can claim are the rights which are given to it in that character, and not the rights which belong to its members as citizens of a state." In 1889, in Pembina Silver Mining Co. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Court said the term "citizen" in the Constitution "...applies only to natural persons, members of the body politic owing allegiance to the state, not to artificial persons created by the legislature, and possessing only such attributes as the legislature has prescribed."
Note the Pembina decision was written three years AFTER Santa Clara County, so how can ANY subsequent Court claim Santa Clara County established the precedent for corporate personhood? (Not to mention Thom's exposure of that decision's technical but absolute failure to do so.)
Citizens United is in monstrous jeopardy, and only a monstrously corrupt Court (John Roberts' Court, say) can uphold it. Take to the barricades, friends and neighbors.
The corporate chokehold on life in America--our culture, our economy, our democracy--is THE story of the times, and corporate personhood is the Achilles heel, the target for a lethal injection.
Since its decision on Santa Clara County the Supreme Court is singularly responsible for the hegemonic role of corporations, as Thom was first to point out in UnEqual Protection.
Historically, the Court was dead-right-spot-on about corporate personhood. In 1809, in Hope Insurance Co. v. Boardman, the Court said, "...a body corporate as such cannot be a citizen within the meaning of the Constitution." In 1839, in Bank of Augusta v. Earle, the Court held, "The only rights [a corporation] can claim are the rights which are given to it in that character, and not the rights which belong to its members as citizens of a state." In 1889, in Pembina Silver Mining Co. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Court said the term "citizen" in the Constitution "...applies only to natural persons, members of the body politic owing allegiance to the state, not to artificial persons created by the legislature, and possessing only such attributes as the legislature has prescribed."
Note the Pembina decision was written three years AFTER Santa Clara County, so how can ANY subsequent Court claim Santa Clara County established the precedent for corporate personhood? (Not to mention Thom's exposure of that decision's technical but absolute failure to do so.)
Citizens United is in monstrous jeopardy, and only a monstrously corrupt Court (John Roberts' Court, say) can uphold it. Take to the barricades, friends and neighbors.