Home | About | Donate

Corporate Constitutional Rights are Cancerous to Democracy

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/07/27/corporate-constitutional-rights-are-cancerous-democracy

3 Likes

“Corporate Constitutional Rights are Cancerous to Democracy”

I’d wager that that is the covert goal.

2 Likes

We live in a CORPORATE MILITARY POLICE STATE!

SUPPORT INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM----SUPPORT THE COMMONS-

Pelosi should not sign off on any deal until the feds are pulled from these cities

3 Likes

Hi iIIusion:
Besides Iosing aII their kiIIer lawsuits—maybe it would be a great idea to make Monsanto change their product name—as a warning to peopIe’So RoundUp might become KIIIUp, or DeathUp, or even DIEOFF as a better warning to consumers. : )

1 Like

It’s an uphill battle when even the ACLU has been captured by its corporate donors and reflexively defends corporate personhood. Corporate right to free speech (which, IIRC, the ACLU defended before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals) effectively upends all attempts at truth in advertising.

I’m pretty sure that it was Hugo Black who had his clerks do a study on the use of the 14th Amendment in civil rights cases, which found that 94% of those cases involved corporations petitioning for civil rights, and only 6% from minorities.

A sad commentary on “the rule of law” in this country.

2 Likes

Using the judges decision as a reference, I would say the corporate first amendment rights are stronger than the individuals first amendment rights. People have a right to free speech, but not when that free speech could endanger other citizens health or safety. Example, you don’t have the right to yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater, if there’s no fire, because people could potentially be hurt or trampled by doing so. But according to this judge, Bayer (Monsanto) has the first amendment right to inflict pain, suffering, and possible death, by keeping a potential risk of cancer from using their product a secret from the public.
Time to investigate the personal finances and/or sanity of this judge.

1 Like

He’s not wise enough to make the decision.

If he just followed the law of love it would be a simple demonstration of what works for first the planet and humans .

Life is prime value …

I’m just a lay person when it comes to law, but it doesn’t seem like he followed past precedent of 1st amendment rulings either.

I’m not American and as you a lay person in this regard.

Each generation must be able to amend the constitution as they see .
Was this not the ideals of Thomas Jefferson, nothing should be set in stone .

Do corporations need ,fresh air, pure water or unpolluted land ?

Take some responsibility humans, don’t leave it to folks who have had their "minds mined " by cultural beliefs that have nothing to do with ultimate reality.
John Trudell.

The civil need to get organised as the organised are uncivil.

There comes a time when the rights
of the many must supersede the rights of the few ,society has a responsibility to itself ?

A corporation gets to sell death,suffering ,poisons the eco system and the judge says ,hell yeah that’s its first amendment rights .

No wonder we face extinction , education is the key let’s teach some critical thinking , values and wisdom with some knowledge.

3 Likes

Meant to say wouldn’t it be a wonderful world if the purpose of life was to create heaven on Earth .
Humans both the bane and blessing of the universe.

The only question is Who are You ?

What do you choose ? More life or quicker death ?
Concious considers consequences.

Time to Awaken The Species

2 Likes

Supreme Court conservatives have in recent years promoted at least two distinct legal philosophies that we lay persons have heard about. For some time we heard about the legal doctrine of “original intent” where laws were to be interpreted according to what the writer intended. Of course divining what was in the minds of long dead people is certainly difficult, but you can take into account their letters and other writings that may still be available. From this perspective it would seem likely that the word “person” in the Constitution did not envision the inclusion of corporations. No, it seems clear that “person” in that document refers to a living, breathing Homo Sapien and quite likely only white male ones.

But recently we have been hearing about another legal philosophy, textualism. In this view, laws should be interpreted according to the actual meaning of the text of the law and how very convenient this is. The meaning of words and phrases are in continual flux; they change over time and even between individuals. The word “person” is a case in point. In common usage, a corporation is certainly not a person, but in the special technical language of the law, corporations are indeed persons.

Apparently the word “speech” also has a different meaning for some judges. The right to free speech seems to include the right, at least of corporations, to spend money and to force mere organic people to hear what they have to say. This seems a bit asinine to common people, but as Charles Dickens said in the voice of Mr. Bumble, “The Law is an ass”.

2 Likes

FDR solved the problem with a a 94% wealth tax.

Why did Liz ever listen to Hillary?

1 Like

Nonsanto’s disregard for people’s health is just one of the more visible corporate crimes. Capitalism is a Cancer that is ravaging humanity and the ecosystems that we depend upon. The analogy that capitalism is like “fire” is a good one. Unless it is contained and regulated it will consume all before it and burn the house down. Cancer also can rage out of control and destroy like fire unless contained. Corporate constitutional rights fuel the fire of capitalism, they fuel the cancer that is Capitalism.

1 Like

The underlying problem with any society where by design everything resides behind a money wall is that the money eventually takes over everything.

So it is with the ACLU. They need money to operate and so rely on those Corporations and when they rely on those Corporations for donations they are compromised.

With Corporate person hood “Money is Free Speech” and in this world any one that wants to be heard needs money.

Great idea…Back in 2005, an American litigation lawyer named Joel Bakan living in Vancouver wrote a book and produced a documentary entitled," The Corporation". He knew that Corporations had “snatched” from the American Judicial System the " rights of person hood" and so he went about writing and showing in his documentary what a Corporation looks like " as a person". It’s not pretty. If you haven’t read the book, I encourage you to get it and read it. The documentary is excellent as well. Thanks Mr. Bakan.
Mr. Blair M. Phillips
Canada
Retired

1 Like

Thank you.

Not Capitalism, that is not what you are witnessing

This is Fascism , or as Mussolini coined it " Corporatism" !

We have to realize this is a bi-partisan atrocity. Both corrupt parties have been for corporations.