I'm sure Dr. Brozian knows his view of the First Amendment is not
presently ascendant at the US Supreme Court level.
While corporations may claim to be "persons" their rights are deemed
derivative of natural persons who "associate" together into corporate
bodies for political purposes, whether they realize that when they buy
stock, or not. Even if corporate bodies are "persons" for selected
constitutional purposes I've not heard anybody claim that they are
"the people."
On that point, the first amendment does say that the "right of **the
people** to peaceably assemble" shall not be infringed. Or, perhaps
Jim Bopp does hold that corporations are "the people?"
A different Supreme Court could overrule about as much precedent as
Citizens United did and declare that corporations are not assemblies
of "the people" but of different admixtures of entities and natural
persons, and thereby rule them open to speech regulation while keeping
natural persons free and equal in their individual speech rights,
including those organizations such as the ACLU where natural person
members associate for speech purposes. Obviously that is not now the
US Supreme Court's view.
Paul Lehto, J.D.
On 10/2/10, JBoppjr@aol.com <JBoppjr@aol.com> wrote:
Now that Dr. Bozian has found out that he is completely wrong on what the
First Amendment says, I assume he will now concede that he is in error and
will withdraw his sharp, and now acknowledged unjustified, criticism of Mr.
Abrams. Jim Bopp
In a message dated 10/2/2010 1:52:53 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
BSmith@law.capital.edu writes:
But if corporations aren't people, then physically they can't speak, so
you will have no worries. They will never, with or without Citizens
United,
affect an election.
But maybe they can speak like a robot! But would programming a robot to
speak be protected speech? I assume so. Why? - because a person had to
program it. Indeed, we really already have mechanical speech, as when
recordings play a message over and over, or as when a person posts a
political
video on YouTube that others can then watch. I presume that a deaf/mute
person would be protected in programming a robot to make audible political
statements on his behalf that, he feels, would be an effective way for him
to
communicate.
Of course, the reality is that corporations are made up of people, and
people have a right to associate, and associations of people have a right
to
speak. And corporate personhood does not stem from a decision that never
examined the issue. I know that's Tom Hartmann's view, but Hartmann is
neither a lawyer nor an historian, and it's just not true. The idea of
corporate personhood has existed since the nation's founding, and is well
grounded
in legal theory, history, and precedent.
Bradley A. Smith
Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault Designated Professor of Law
Capital University Law School
303 E. Broad St.
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 236-6317
_http://www.law.capital.edu/Faculty/Bios/bsmith.asp_
(http://www.law.capital.edu/Faculty/Bios/bsmith.asp)
____________________________________
From: election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu on behalf of Richard C. Bozian
Sent: Sat 10/2/2010 12:38 PM
To: election-law@mailman.lls.edu
Subject: [EL] FW: Floyd Abrams & Citzens United
____________________________________
Floyd Abrams has written a masterful exposition of the Citizens United
decision. It is a classical repetition of the fallacy of Xeno's Paradox
which
had the hare never catching the tortoise. One can justify anything by
starting with a faulty assumption.
He justifies the decision on the basis of the 1st Amendment. The 1st
amendment refers to freedom of speech of "the people". Corporations are
not
people anymore than is a robot performing human feats. Corporate
personhood
is a legal fiction that emerged from an interpretation of a court's
deliberation that never examined or even considered corporate personhood.
I am impressed only with his craftsmanship.
Richard C. Bozian M.D. F.A.C.P.
Professor Emeritus of Medicne
University of Cincinnati.
_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law