Subject: Re: [EL] Electionlawblog news and commentary 3/1/11
From: Jon Roland
Date: 3/1/2011, 10:30 AM
To: "election-law@mailman.lls.edu" <election-law@mailman.lls.edu>
Reply-to:
"jon.roland@constitution.org"

This is a mischaracterization of the decision, which was that corporations don't have "personal privacy", not that they are not "persons". Entirely different issue.

In law a "person" is a role that an actor may play in a legal case, not the actor playing it. It is roles, not actors, that have rights, powers, and duties in law. Each individual can be many persons. Everyone is at least a private person and a public person. Other persons an individual can be is "contracting party", "partner', "parent", "child", "heir", "settlor", "trustee", "beneficiary", or "official". Each such person can have different rights, powers, and duties, even though embodied in the same individual.

This is basic Law 101. When did people stop being taught these basics?

On 03/01/2011 12:10 PM, Rick Hasen wrote:

A Corporation is Not a Person, At Least Not Today

Interesting statutory interpretation discussion in today's AT&T case issued by the Supreme Court. One absence in the discussion written by the Chief Justice: no mention of legislative history.



-- Jon

----------------------------------------------------------
Constitution Society               http://constitution.org
2900 W Anderson Ln C-200-322           twitter.com/lex_rex
Austin, TX 78757 512/299-5001  jon.roland@constitution.org
----------------------------------------------------------