As corporations grew and took their modern form, questions inevitably arose about what rights they-and the people behind them-had. In We the Corporations.
The cases often center on a deceptively simple question: are corporations just associations of people, people who have the same rights together that they would have individually in any other context? Or is the corporation a separate entity-an artificial.
The bank would begin the quest for constitutional rights for America's corporations through the little-remembered 1809 case Bank of the United States v. Deveaux.
In a case involving the Second Bank of the United States, which Webster represented, Taney endorsed the concept of corporate personhood-meaning that a corporation was distinct from its members and did not have the same rights they had. Taney also stopped corporations from venue-shopping-moving cases to state court when it would be advantageous to do so by adding a board member from the state, a tactic that had grown common since the first Bank of the United States.
The Court stuck to a simple system for determining whether corporations had constitutional rights: namely, they had "Property" rights, but not "Liberty" rights.
The NAACP, legally a corporation, won a freedom-of-association case in 1958 when the state of Alabama demanded a list of the group's members, presumably to intimidate them; the decision pierced the veil and relied on the rights of the members.
The Founders may have resented some things about corporations, Scalia conceded, but mainly this had to do with "The state-granted monopoly privileges that individually chartered corporations enjoyed." Further, there were other types of entities that were more similar to the corporations we have now: "[R]eligious, educational, and literary corporations were incorporated under general incorporation statutes, much as business corporations are today.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-corporations-won-their-civil-rights/
The cases often center on a deceptively simple question: are corporations just associations of people, people who have the same rights together that they would have individually in any other context? Or is the corporation a separate entity-an artificial.
The bank would begin the quest for constitutional rights for America's corporations through the little-remembered 1809 case Bank of the United States v. Deveaux.
In a case involving the Second Bank of the United States, which Webster represented, Taney endorsed the concept of corporate personhood-meaning that a corporation was distinct from its members and did not have the same rights they had. Taney also stopped corporations from venue-shopping-moving cases to state court when it would be advantageous to do so by adding a board member from the state, a tactic that had grown common since the first Bank of the United States.
The Court stuck to a simple system for determining whether corporations had constitutional rights: namely, they had "Property" rights, but not "Liberty" rights.
The NAACP, legally a corporation, won a freedom-of-association case in 1958 when the state of Alabama demanded a list of the group's members, presumably to intimidate them; the decision pierced the veil and relied on the rights of the members.
The Founders may have resented some things about corporations, Scalia conceded, but mainly this had to do with "The state-granted monopoly privileges that individually chartered corporations enjoyed." Further, there were other types of entities that were more similar to the corporations we have now: "[R]eligious, educational, and literary corporations were incorporated under general incorporation statutes, much as business corporations are today.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-corporations-won-their-civil-rights/
No comments:
Post a Comment