Supreme Court Will Decide Whether Corporations Have Right to Privacy

[MovingTarget]

The Citizens United decision was outrageous. We need to start the debate over with the question, "What rights should corporations, as artficial non-person constructs, have?".

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Strawman much? This about open books for corporate political contributions. And while we are at it, the political action committees too.

Really?

AT&T wants the FCC to keep secret all the information it gathered from the company during an investigation into its participation in the federal E-Rate program, which helps schools and libraries get Internet access.
The FCC had released some of the information under an open records request, but withheld some, citing FOIA exemptions that cover trade secrets and humans' right to privacy.

Show me "political contributions".

Are you so fixated on contributions that you cannot understand what is at issue here?

 

[ElFenix]

WHOA!!!!

Maybe I didn't understand your previous posts, or you don't understand what's going on?

SCOTUS said you can't restrict campaign contributions by corporations

no, they didn't.

,nor can force politicians or corporations to reveal the amount or who made them.

they didn't say that either. that's a law that's currently on the books to protect everyone with unpopular opinions. the supreme court left open disclosure requirements.

it's very clear you didn't bother attempting to understand citizens united.

 

[Pens1566]

Next up, Comcast runs for senate in Pennsylvania.

 

[Mursilis]

Apparently you didn't read the OP. He's celebrating a catastrophe and has shown predisposition for authoritarianism. It seems that if he has his way there would be no rights for corporations. If their destruction isn't part of his ultimate good he hasn't said anything which dispels that impression.

What I did say in this thread is that the concept of corporate personhood has long need a clearer definition which would be to everyone's benefit.

I wouldn't waste your time "debating" with Sandorski. His idea of an intelligent response is "Fail!".

 

[her209]

If corporations are people, then do I have a "right" to (partially) own/sell/buy them?

 

[Atreus21]

I think this decision will turn out to be every bit as important as the Dred Scott decision.

Uh...no. Somehow I think slavery ranks up there a little higher than corporate rights.

 

[Zorkorist]

The Citizens United decision was outrageous. We need to start the debate over with the question, "What rights should corporations, as artficial non-person constructs, have?".

What rights do Governments, as artificial non-person constructs, have?

-John