3 ms·
How can a non-human entity be entitled to free speech...
by kpil 10y ago
How can a non-human entity be entitled to free speech...
- mcintyre1994 10y agoAs I understand it, to allow certain types of lobbying or something companies lobbied for, there's a ruling in the US that companies are people in some contexts.
- jimnotgym 10y agoWhilst corporations are entities apart from their directors, I find this being twisted to mean they are people incredibly distasteful.
- mcintyre1994 10y agoI understand it's probably overly simplistic but can I ask why it's distasteful? The concept is referred to as corporate personhood so I'm not sure why referring to companies as people in the relevant contexts is distasteful as opposed to simplistic.
- cgriswald 10y agoThey are not considered people. They are considered persons. In a legal context, a person is not a human being, but any entity to which rights or responsibilities (also read: liabilities) can be attached. No court has said they are human beings. And they do not have all human rights. They have only those rights which law and case law have put upon them.
- jimnotgym 10y agoYou are right the term is person. And they do not have all human rights. I am no expert in the US constitution either. However I still feel that a corporation argueing for rights to free speech (like Facebook here) is not in the spirit of the contstitution. Free speech is a human right not a corporate one
- DannyBee 10y agoSo, the problem is if you try to treat, say, an LLC as if it's not an entity with any constitutional rights, then, .... it has no constitutional rights. Want microsoft or google or facebook to have a 4th amendment right not to give up your searches or email? Sorry, not a human entity! Want CNN to have the right to publish news under the 1st amendment? Sorry, not a human entity! At least in our legal system, you have no standing to really raise constitutional violations or rights issues of others (except in very very specific circumstances). This is in large part because it would be ridiculously difficult and complicated to make such a thing work (can anyone do it? If so, who gets to do it? First person? Person you like the best? etc) So the solution chosen was to treat these entities as having rights. Not an ideal solution on it's own, mind you, but let's call it a "workaround" for a set of very very hard problems. But every time i see someone say "corporations shouldn't be treated like people", my answer is, "sure, this is pretty much a truism. How do you actually implement it in a way that isn't a complete disaster, though?"
- otterley 10y agoBecause the right to peaceably assemble is also expressly enumerated as an activity protected by the First Amendment.
- moogly 10y agoIn the modern world, it seems, corporations have all the rights of people, but are beholden to none of the obligations.