3 ms·
> 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 a
by 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 agoYa 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 agoCorporations 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.