3 ms·

> Interpreting corporations as “people” IMO was such a misread of the constitution that it’s led to various interpretations here. These are corporations, not pe

> Interpreting corporations as “people” IMO was such a misread of the constitution that it’s led to various interpretations here. These are corporations, not people. Corporations have been legal persons for many centuries/millennia: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation#History The same principle applies to (professional) societies, communities/municipalities, guilds, unions (locals), universities, etc: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University#History Be curious to know about the legal history of treating legal and natural persons differently.

throwoutway 4y ago
I’ve been reading what you linked and I see nowhere that the all the same legal rights of PEOPLE were applied to corporations for millennia. Not sure if you actually found that either? Either way, I’m arguing that it is an unintuitive idea in light of the fact that the Bill of Rights was written with people in mind as the recipients of those rights, and not corporations. If Google suddenly invoked their “right” to bear arms and form well regulated militias, we wouldn’t be swirling our oat milk saying “well they have the right”. I’m arguing they shouldn’t
- throw0101c 4y ago
  > I’ve been reading what you linked and I see nowhere that the all the same legal rights of PEOPLE were applied to corporations for millennia. Not sure if you actually found that either? Ability to partake in contracts, due process of law, have internal rules of conduct (like having a conscience). Are these not rights that both both 'types of persons' have? > There are therefore two kinds of legal entities: human and non-human. In law, a human person is called a natural person (sometimes also a physical person), and a non-human person is called a juridical person (sometimes also a juridic, juristic, artificial, legal, or fictitious person, Latin: persona ficta). * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juridical_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juridical_person IANAL.
  - throwoutway 4y ago
    Ya that doesn’t say they had the ALL the same rights as people. You’re actually proving my point that they’re different by people and got a different definition with different interpretations, NOT the same
    - ChadNauseam 4y ago
      Corporations are not the same as people in the US and there are many rights that people have that corporations don’t. They are legal persons in the sense that they can sign contracts and have the right to a fair trial and have a right to free speech.
- Volundr 4y ago
  Private militias already exist in the US and are legal. There is absolutely nothing stopping google from forming one. Should they? No. Would it be completely legal to do so? Yes.
eternalban 4y ago
I am looking at a copy of European Legal History, Robinson, Fergus, Gordon, Oxford 2000, 3rd ed. Section New Trends in Law 1814-1914, discusses "17.2 - organization of business" and provides some answers. - Corporations "prior to 19th century" were 'privileges' granted by a sovereign, not 'rights'. East-India among others is an example. (17.2.6) - "The joint stock company is an incorporated body, a legal person in its own right, distinct from its shareholders and directors. This eases the path of those having commercial dealing with it ..." (17.2.5) goes on to enumerate how corporation as a legal person suites the modern economic regime. So basically, corporations are legal persons because of Capitalism. (My op.) - ps which is imo not a bad thing, actually. This is a classic case of a legacy decision/design in a system made at a time when there were more limited knowledge and information. And task is how to unravel the error without taking down the whole system. What we want is a legal scope around the person-hood of a corporation that allows for good (if not optimal) economic regime (in general, possibly including ethical dimensions), and yet does not distort the distinction between human beings -- and we have Natural Rights that are conferred by none other than the Goddess/God/Big Daddy/The Architect/"Fundamental-Laws", take your pick /g and can not be taken away by any legal mechanism -- and corporations don't, because we are a first order side effect of the Universe and these things are just organizations.
- throw0101c 4y ago
  > So basically, corporations are legal persons because of Capitalism. See The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession by Brundage, which has a few chapters on law during the Roman period, as well as chapters on the creation of universities, along with mentions of things like guilds and town charters, which were collective groupings of people treated as a single entity. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Brundage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Brundage * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University#Definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University#Definition * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_History_of_the_University_in_Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_History_of_the_University_in... Going back to Ancient Rome for non-commercial purposes: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associations_in_ancient_Rome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associations_in_ancient_Rome * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collegium_(ancient_Rome) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collegium_(ancient_Rome)

throwoutway 4y ago

I’ve been reading what you linked and I see nowhere that the all the same legal rights of PEOPLE were applied to corporations for millennia. Not sure if you actually found that either? Either way, I’m arguing that it is an unintuitive idea in light of the fact that the Bill of Rights was written with people in mind as the recipients of those rights, and not corporations. If Google suddenly invoked their “right” to bear arms and form well regulated militias, we wouldn’t be swirling our oat milk saying “well they have the right”. I’m arguing they shouldn’t

throw0101c 4y ago
> I’ve been reading what you linked and I see nowhere that the all the same legal rights of PEOPLE were applied to corporations for millennia. Not sure if you actually found that either? Ability to partake in contracts, due process of law, have internal rules of conduct (like having a conscience). Are these not rights that both both 'types of persons' have? > There are therefore two kinds of legal entities: human and non-human. In law, a human person is called a natural person (sometimes also a physical person), and a non-human person is called a juridical person (sometimes also a juridic, juristic, artificial, legal, or fictitious person, Latin: persona ficta). * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juridical_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juridical_person IANAL.
- throwoutway 4y ago
  Ya that doesn’t say they had the ALL the same rights as people. You’re actually proving my point that they’re different by people and got a different definition with different interpretations, NOT the same
  - ChadNauseam 4y ago
    Corporations are not the same as people in the US and there are many rights that people have that corporations don’t. They are legal persons in the sense that they can sign contracts and have the right to a fair trial and have a right to free speech.
Volundr 4y ago
Private militias already exist in the US and are legal. There is absolutely nothing stopping google from forming one. Should they? No. Would it be completely legal to do so? Yes.

eternalban 4y ago

I am looking at a copy of European Legal History, Robinson, Fergus, Gordon, Oxford 2000, 3rd ed. Section New Trends in Law 1814-1914, discusses "17.2 - organization of business" and provides some answers. - Corporations "prior to 19th century" were 'privileges' granted by a sovereign, not 'rights'. East-India among others is an example. (17.2.6) - "The joint stock company is an incorporated body, a legal person in its own right, distinct from its shareholders and directors. This eases the path of those having commercial dealing with it ..." (17.2.5) goes on to enumerate how corporation as a legal person suites the modern economic regime. So basically, corporations are legal persons because of Capitalism. (My op.) - ps which is imo not a bad thing, actually. This is a classic case of a legacy decision/design in a system made at a time when there were more limited knowledge and information. And task is how to unravel the error without taking down the whole system. What we want is a legal scope around the person-hood of a corporation that allows for good (if not optimal) economic regime (in general, possibly including ethical dimensions), and yet does not distort the distinction between human beings -- and we have Natural Rights that are conferred by none other than the Goddess/God/Big Daddy/The Architect/"Fundamental-Laws", take your pick /g and can not be taken away by any legal mechanism -- and corporations don't, because we are a first order side effect of the Universe and these things are just organizations.

throw0101c 4y ago
> So basically, corporations are legal persons because of Capitalism. See The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession by Brundage, which has a few chapters on law during the Roman period, as well as chapters on the creation of universities, along with mentions of things like guilds and town charters, which were collective groupings of people treated as a single entity. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Brundage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Brundage * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University#Definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University#Definition * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_History_of_the_University_in_Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_History_of_the_University_in... Going back to Ancient Rome for non-commercial purposes: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associations_in_ancient_Rome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associations_in_ancient_Rome * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collegium_(ancient_Rome) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collegium_(ancient_Rome)