Summations Only

I have yet to hear a corporation speak.When I stand in line to vote, I notice no corporations waiting with me.When I carried arms for my country, I found no corporate buddies marching with me to face enemy fire.I have no desire to see any laws restrict political speech. I don't see what that has to do with corporations.

All corporations are ultimately owned and operated by humans. So curtailing corporation speech always involves curtailing some human being's speech.Now obviously the ownership and control by human beings need not be the end of the analysis, but pretending that there are no humans involved whatsoever and then claiming that you "don't see" any First Amendment issue at play is surely too simplistic.George Bush, Barrack Obama, and Bill Clinton never went on patrol with me on a submarine. So they need to shut up?

The issue is not corporations. The issue is the right of the government to limit political speech. It don't exist.

No -- those people have their own personal voice and right to speech, giving corporations the same right means that the owners have two voices (as well as dollups of cash), in addition giving corporations those rights assumes that all workers for that corporation are also wanting to express that speech -- an obvious fallacy.Corporations are NOT people.

Surely there are no limits on the number of voices or the volume of speech that is protected under the First Amendment. You get one vote, but you can speak all you want.

The individual should be able to speak. The corporation should have no voice.

Except the law says they do have a voice. We have to change the law. Unfortunately, the law in question is the constitution.So the discussion has come full circle, again.

But the Constitution does not say that corporations have a voice. The SCOTUS found that corporations were individuals. The Scotus can find that corporations are not individuals and have no voice.I think that is actually the ONLY option and hope avialable.The Scotus have a job for life. They are the least likely to be influenced by Corporate America. To rely on amendment or legislation is too late.

So what?Groups of people get together and decide to do (name it). It doesn't matter if they are 2 or 5 or 1000, a club, an association, a partnership, an LP, LLP, LLLP or they incorporate for liability or tax purposes. Even if the court decided that corporations are not people these are still assembled forms of us - we the people.If "we" decide to write a political opinion piece or TV ad to distribute anywhere and everywhere, that is political "speech".

quote:

---

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

---

The government is not allowed to stop "us", individually or collectively ... yet.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : soften tone

No, Congress is limited except through the Amendment process, but not the SCOTUS.

So you think SCOTUS is empowered to limit political speech on its own volition?

What? Two voices? How so?Why can I not use my corporation to add influence to my personal vote? Where does that become two votes?Edited by Catholic Scientist, : fixed brackets

Limiting speech is just a side effect. What they decide is that corporations are not individuals and so have no rights of free speech.

Good luck with that.

I think it is actually the only hope the US has from continuing down the path towards Corporate Fascism.I don't see it happening but do believe it is more possible than either the Amendment route or the Legislative route.