Quantcast
Opinion

Letter: Corporations as people

Comments

Return To Article
  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    July 17, 2014 6:11 a.m.

    Agreed!

    A "Corporation" is an entity,
    without body, parts or passions.

    It now has all the legal "rights" as a human being,
    but it is NOT a human being.

    It can break the law, even "murder to get gain",
    but can not go to jail or be executed.

    It can "manage and control" the Government,
    but it can not vote per se, but it can "but" votes.

    It can take the treasures of the earth,
    and can buy up armies and navies,
    and rule and reign with blood and horror.

    I see the "birth" of the "Beast" mentioned in the Book of Revelations,
    and the "Gadianton Robbers" mentioned in the Book of Mormon who serve it.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    July 17, 2014 6:39 a.m.

    Excellent piece by Roland! Completely shreds the activist Supreme Court!

    I hope repubs are happy about what these activist judges have done. They've written legislation and overruled the will of the majority to completely redefine traditional corporation. Traditional corporation did not have religious views. It was a job. Now that repub activist judges have destroyed the traditional corporation, our society will greatly suffer.

    Just look at the slippery slope! What happens if treating your cancer is against their view? What happens if bearing arms is against their view? What happens if marrying a woman and having kids is against their view? What happens if paying you a salary, giving you breaks, and a weekend is against their view?

    Corporations were an institution which benefitted families. You worked, earned a salary, and had benefits.

    Now, it appears as if a corporation is just a greedy entity that is made for narcissists who can cut your benefits and salary at a whim.

    All thanks, to activist judges who overruled the will of the majority. Our country will only survive as long as traditional corporation exists.

  • ordinaryfolks seattle, WA
    July 17, 2014 6:42 a.m.

    A very good point.

    Corporations don't have a conscience, and frankly most of their CEO's or directors do as well (in big corporate America).

    If people understood the ways in which this notion of corporate personhood evolved, then they may not be so tricked by the legal legerdemain that our Supreme Court has foisted upon us. It is a sham, and we are all going to suffer for it.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    July 17, 2014 7:25 a.m.

    Suppose you have a job and over the course of a few years, you receive raise after raise after raise. You go to the bank and get a loan to buy a house. The economy suffers. You take out bankruptcy. Do you lose your house? According to my lawyer friend who handles bankruptcies, you won't necessarily lose that home, even though you owe tens of thousands of dollars to the bank. Shouldn't you have to pay for that home? Not according to the law. The bank will lose, not you.

    A corporation will lose its assets when it goes bankrupt, but it will not have to have its employees repay all of their wages to settle debts. The employees' wages are safe. It will not have to have the government refund all the taxes that the corporation paid. Taxes are safe. It will not have to have stock holders refund past dividends. The dividends are safe. The stockholders WILL lose the value of stock that they hold. Stock is not protected. The "owners" will lose their investment when the stock becomes worthless.

    That sounds fair to me.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    July 17, 2014 8:09 a.m.

    Corporations are the new kings and we it's servants.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    July 17, 2014 8:13 a.m.

    I hope you all realize that a corportion can be a one person entity, not just a multi national. So many of you anti corporate types (who by the way have a great life because of what many corporations have provided. But I digress) seem to see corporations as only huge multi national entities. American corporate law provided a good, legal, financial, protection to PEOPLE. That is why those laws have been enacted. It helps take away much risk that PEOPLE will lose everything if the corporation fails or gets sued. Otherwise PEOPLE would not risk investing and working and creating goods, services, and wealth for our nation. Like I said, many of these corporations, run by PEOPLE, have provided most of you with things in life that would never have happened if not for the American corporate law structure, which gives PEOPLE, the ability to do so. And so many on the left seem to want to boogie man American coroporations. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Corporations are PEOPLE, every bit as much as unions, political parties, universities, ect. are PEOPLE.

  • Atlas Smashed Santa Monica, CA
    July 17, 2014 8:15 a.m.

    I don't think that non-elected judges should have the right to draft legislation and change the definition of a corporation. If Roberts wants to do that then he should campaign, become elected, and pass new legislation through the defined process.

    @Mike Richards

    Where in the Constitution does it specifically state that "corporations are people"? If you cannot find a bill of rights for corporations then I'll let you in on a secret... They don't exist!

    From what I see, the greatest threat to America isn't marriage. But the redefining of the Constitution to allow conservatives to invade whatever country they want, bail out whatever bank they want, subsidize whatever oil company they want, and empower corporations to hurt the American people in whatever way they want.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    July 17, 2014 8:16 a.m.

    @The Real Maverick
    Orem, UT
    6:39 a.m. July 17, 2014

    Just look at the slippery slope!

    ======

    Agreed!

    Corporate "entities" are legally "People".
    with full protection and Constitutional rights.

    They exist for one thing, and one thing only -- PROFIT! [gain]
    If they do not make Profit [gain] they Die,

    So, now it's the Government's duty to protect a Corporations right to --
    LIFE, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.

    Think about it --
    Corporations now have "Free Speech" [bribery]
    Corporations now have "Freedom of Religion".

    Therefore --
    Corporations now also have "the right of the CORPORATIONS to keep and bear ARMS, shall not be infringed."

    BTW - Some these "corporations" build our Thermal Nuclear, Biological and Chemical weapons...think about it.

    Corporations are now protected against "searches and seizures".

    Courts and Juries by their "peers" -- i.e., OTHER Corporations and Businessmen, perhaps?

    How about running for "Office", Imagine a Business "entity",
    Because Business can always do things better than Government,
    Why not run the Government efficiently -- as a Corporation, BY the Corporation, and FOR the Corporation!

    It's like ever Republican's Fantasy DREAM come true...

    One other thing,
    Corporations DON'T even have to be Americans.....

    ===========

    Mike - You still good with all this?

  • Ranch Here, UT
    July 17, 2014 8:30 a.m.

    It's called having your cake and your neighbor's too.

  • micawber Centerville, UT
    July 17, 2014 8:33 a.m.

    @Mike Richards,

    If you take bankruptcy, you may claim a homestead exemption. In Utah, if that homestead includes a personal residence, you are entitled to a homestead exemption of up to $30,000. You must still pay your mortgage. The exemption differs by state.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    July 17, 2014 8:35 a.m.

    @SCfan;

    A one-person owned corporation is still a corporation - specifically designed to separate the owner from the liabilities incurred by the corporation. If the corporation is the person, then the person should be liable for the debts and losses of said corporation.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    July 17, 2014 9:06 a.m.

    I understand the rationale for corporations in that incorporation aids capital formation. As a Marxist, however, I wish we could understand that all relationships are social ones. That all exchanges and actions are between people. For example, if I work for Walmart and Walmart doesn't provide me with health insurance, it is not Walmart which denying me insurance, it is the Walton family - real people. Marx asks us to look past objects and legal forms to the social relations that are behind everything.

  • a bit of reality Shawnee Mission, KS
    July 17, 2014 9:28 a.m.

    I'll beleive that corporations are people as soon as Texas executes one.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    July 17, 2014 10:26 a.m.

    What happens if treating your cancer is against their view? liberal Progressive view go home and take two aspirin.
    What happens if bearing arms is against their view? liberal Progressive gun control
    What happens if marrying a woman and having kids is against their view? liberal Progressive abortion and population control.
    What happens if paying you a salary, giving you breaks, and a weekend is against their view? liberal Progressive state controlled corporations in communist countries like China and North Korea.

    "Corporations were an institution which benefitted families." No corporations were created solely to benefit their shareholders, period. They use the management of resources to accomplish this goal for the benefit of their shareholders.

    "Corporations are now protected against "searches and seizures". fear mongering at best they have less protections against this than individuals.

    "I don't think that non-elected judges should have the right to draft legislation and change the definition" -- of marriage. Is that your opinion?

    And Vancouver is a city in the southern end of Washington, the state you spent so much time before returning to Utah,across from Portland Oregon, ( because I hit my limit on the other thread.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    July 17, 2014 10:39 a.m.

    "Corporations now have "Free Speech" Isn't that also called a newspaper, the ultimate corporate free speech. Should we tell these corporations they can not say anything? Is not advertising in a newspaper bribery in the sense advertising in a newspaper that supports your position and that newspaper uses its voice to influence the government to support your position.

    Yes there are slippery slopes and liberals are sliding right on down them.

    They don't like freedom of assembly, they don't like freedom of religion, they don't like armed opponents, they don't like equity of possibilities for everyone. They don't like resolving poverty, they want old people to die and go away, they are racist in they support planned parenthood whose very foundation was to eliminate poverty by eliminating the lower classes and minorities who they felt were racially impure. (Read Margaret Sangers works and publications)

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    July 17, 2014 10:52 a.m.

    "I'll beleive that corporations are people as soon as Texas executes one." a bit of reality

    States and Texas also do execute corporations, by revoking their charters to operate. Happens all the time. So does this mean you believe they are people now.

  • Confused Sandy, UT
    July 17, 2014 11:04 a.m.

    Atlas Smashed
    “I don't think that non-elected judges should have the right to draft legislation and change the definition of a corporation.”
    But you don’t mind SCOTUS redefining Marriage, Right? Or the fact that Obama took the Commerce clause and changed it to push through Obama Care… and SCOTUS (Judge Roberts Specifically) allowed it.

  • Confused Sandy, UT
    July 17, 2014 11:05 a.m.

    Atlas Smashed
    Part 2
    “Where in the Constitution does it specifically state that "corporations are people"? If you cannot find a bill of rights for corporations then I'll let you in on a secret... They don't exist! “
    Show me one place in the constitution that says there is a separation of Church and State? Nowhere! “Establish” does not mean Separate. In Fact show me where it says Marriage is a right.
    Oh yea, SCOTUS had a ruling that say that. But that is ok because it goes along with you agenda…

    But the redefining of the Constitution to allow conservatives to invade whatever country they want, bail out whatever bank they want, subsidize whatever oil company they want, and empower corporations to hurt the American people in whatever way they want.
    But it ok for Obama to push the bailout of the Auto Industry from 17.6 billion to over 85 billion, because he deemed that it was wholly inadequate.
    Or the fact that he violated the constitution with recess appointments, and allow all his policies to go into effect by department rules and regulations rather than go through Congress.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 17, 2014 11:19 a.m.

    Roland,
    For one... You're not on the Supreme Court. So what YOU think doesn't matter as much as what they think.

    I think they understand the Constitution better than you do. So I'm going to trust THEM on this one.

    Nobody said, "Corporations are people". So you can probably drop that strawman.

    What they actually said is... Corporations have a right to express themselves and fight for their own self-interest. And part of that right to free speech includes a right donate to political campaigns, or even make commercials.

    But nobody on the Supreme Court actually said they are people.

    ==========

    I think corporations have a right to pursue their own self-interest. Some politicians would try to put them out of business... they have a right to fight AGAINST those politicians.

    But people have rights corporations DON'T have. One of them is freedom of association. We don't have to go to their business or buy their products if we don't want to. We can go to ANY business we want (and stay away from any business we want).

    Don't support the businesses you think are ruining our politics!

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    July 17, 2014 11:36 a.m.

    Where would you anti-corporation people be without corporations? Would you build your own cars? Would you build your own appliances? Where would you shop for groceries, for clothes, for gas? Would you only go to home produced movies, concerts, and book readings? Would you only listen to neighborhood sponsored radio and TV? In Utah, where would you go to Church. Where would you bank?

    Go ahead and tell us all about those "evil" corporations, the ones that you use everyday to do the things that you want to do and to buy the things that you want to own.

    It seems quite hypocritical to me that you slam corporations even as you pass your dollars to them.

    If you really believe what you're writing on this thread, you'll break off all contact with corporations. You divest yourself of anything that you own that comes from corporations. AFTER you've done that, then tell us what you think about those "evil" corporations.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 17, 2014 11:56 a.m.

    BTW... the biggest contributors throwing their money around in the hopes of influencing politics and voters are... the people who advertise every week during "Meet the Press" (one of my favorite programs).

    GE, Boeing, Chevron, etc. Watch the show. Watch who pays millions to advertise during the show... these are the HUGE hitters in the money being contributed to campaigns in Washington, investing huge sums in BOTH side's campaigns, (they can't afford to be on the loosing side so they contribute a lot to BOTH sides) and spend a LOT of $$$ trying to influence the mind and will of the people.

    Barack Obama invited the CEO of one of these companies to join his cabinet (even though during the campaign he promised NO CEOs would be part of HIS cabinet). Shows how powerful they are... They (and their money) can even change the President's mind...

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    July 17, 2014 12:12 p.m.

    This definition from Wikipedia might help:

    "Corporate personhood is an American legal concept that a corporation may be recognized as an individual in the eyes of the law. This doctrine forms the basis for legal recognition that corporations, as groups of people, may hold and exercise certain rights under the common law and the U.S. Constitution. For example, corporations may contract with other parties and sue or be sued in court in the same way as natural persons or unincorporated associations of persons. The doctrine does not hold that corporations are flesh and blood "people" apart from their shareholders, executives, and managers, nor does it grant to corporations all of the rights of citizens."

    To me, the key words are: "legal concept" and "in the eyes of the law". Others have said that "under the law, corporations are seen as a person". I have been part of corporations all my life and I agree with Wikipedia's definition.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    July 17, 2014 12:25 p.m.

    @Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah

    It seems quite hypocritical to me that you slam corporations even as you pass your dollars to them.

    =======

    And yet --
    It seems even more hypocritical to me that you slam [Anti-GOD COMMUNISTS] even as you pass your dollars to them.

    We Liberal may support America's God-fearing Unions,
    but your sorts support China's God-less Communists.

    Mark my words -- Corporations are EVERYTHING we've been prophesied and warned about.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    July 17, 2014 12:44 p.m.

    To "Roland Kayser" once again your lack of understanding is put on display.

    If the company that you establish goes away, eventually you will no longer be able to be paid. If at one time you had a salary of $100,000, but now that is the total sales of your business you can't expect to be paid anymore. If you cannot be paid anymore, then you are directly effected by the business.

    Plus, depending on how you establish the business will determine your liabilities. If you set up your business as a Sole, General, or Limited Proprietorship, then you will be responsible for any debts the company has. In fact, under most business structures you are personally liable for debts that the business incurs.

    Nice try, but try again after you do a Google Search on how businesses are formed and the liabilities of the owners of those businesses.

    Plus, think about this. If businesses don't get the same rights as people, then why does the NY Times get protection using Freedom of the Press?

    Also, the recent ruling does not grant corporations person status. It grants the owners of businesses the right to determine what will buy.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    July 17, 2014 1:00 p.m.

    Open Minded Mormon,

    Wow! What hyperbole!

    Where was the cell phone in your pocket made? Where was your computer, your TV, your stereo made?

    You talk of "God-fearing Unions". Which unions are "God-fearing"? Do they start union meetings with a prayer? Do they base all decisions on the Bible?

    I've worked for two companies who were approached by union organizers. Their "heavy handed" tactics were far from being "God-fearing". Maybe some unions are "God-fearing", but no one that I know knows anything about that type of union.

    Apple is an American corporation. It has huge manufacturing facilities in China. I'm typing this from a Mac Mini Server that I'm setting up for J Thompson, who is one of my clients. He's running through some tutorials on a Mac in another room. He likes Apple products. So do I. Is Apple evil? Are their manufacturing facilities "evil"?

    Corporations allow people like you and me to invest in a business that we could never own ourselves. We are only financially liable to the extent of the stock we own. Are we "evil" for buying stock?

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    July 17, 2014 1:10 p.m.

    jsf
    Centerville, UT
    "Corporations now have "Free Speech" Isn't that also called a newspaper, the ultimate corporate free speech.

    Newspapers are specifically mentioned by name.

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    July 17, 2014 1:56 p.m.

    @The Real Maverick:
    "Completely shreds the activist Supreme Court!"

    The court made a significant error in ruling about contraception/abortion in healthcare insurance. It shoulda ruled that health insurance need not cover ANY contraception/abortion expenses.

    Health insurgence is designed to cover unforeseen health situations that are beyond the control of individuals insured. All conditions involving pregnancy or the prevention/termination thereof are under the control of the person(s) involved... (with the exception of pregnancy from rape).

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    July 17, 2014 2:15 p.m.

    This is another situation where the constitution has not kept up with the times. The idea or corporations in the way they exist today wasn't even a thing when the constitution was written, and even in the early 1900's corporations were more of a time sensitive venture, and didn't exist in perpetuity like corporations of today. In fact in olden times major companies were never set up as corporations(look at Carnegie and Rockefeller, their business's were all set up as trusts), due to the fact that they had strong restrictions that limited them from growing to large. Clearly the founding fathers couldn't fathom an entitiy like GE, Wal Mart or Exxon in the late 1700's. We as Americans need to be more proactive at changing things that weren't factored into the original document(BTW, that is one thing we do know that the founding fathers did intend to happen, unlike speculation as to if they would approve of current interpretation)

  • Atlas Smashed Santa Monica, CA
    July 17, 2014 2:18 p.m.

    "The court made a significant error in ruling about contraception/abortion in healthcare insurance. It shoulda ruled that health insurance need not cover ANY contraception/abortion expenses."

    That's not what then out ruled.

    The court ruled that corporations have religious beliefs.

    By the court's ruling, corporations no longer have to abide by the EPA, not discriminate Mormons, or even pay salaries if it's against their "religious beliefs."

    Is this really the "freedom" that the radical right constantly talks about?

    Gee, thanks Supreme Court for opening this can of worms.

    Robert and his fellow repub cohorts have helped to create the worst Supreme Court ever. They're an utter train wreck.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    July 17, 2014 2:26 p.m.

    @ wrz and Redshirt

    So why is Viagra still covered? Isn't that a personal decision as well?

    And if Hobby Lobby is as religious as it pretends, why does it continue to support an evil and repressive communist regime?

    If they really want to live their religion, then they would give up all their child labor made Chinese junk.

    In fact, why not get rid of the whole corporation model? I'd love to get back to small businesses. Give the power back to the people. Make them accountable. That way, when they fail, my tax dollars won't be spent because a group of banks and corporations have bought off the Republican Party.

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    July 17, 2014 2:32 p.m.

    Corporations were classified as persons to limit actions such as suits to the business entity only, thus protecting owners from such action. This situation was needed where ownership began to be spread far and wide such as ownership (stock) being traded on a stock exchange such as NASDAQ. Can you imagine someone having to sue several thousand stock owners for redress of wrongs rather than just the corporate entity itself?

    The Hobby Lobby ruling covered just closely (family) held corporations. If Hobby Lobby were to ever go public spreading ownership across thousands of buyers, the court's ruling would likely cease to be applicable. Indeed, the Hobby Lobby ruling does not apply to publicly held corporations.

    Then there's the concept of 'Piercing the Corporate veil' which means stockholders (owners) can be sued despite the protection accorded the corporate ownership. Usually a corporation is treated as a separate legal person, which is solely responsible for its debts but when the corporate veil is 'pierced' owners become liable. This legal concept applies only in very limited ownership companies.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    July 17, 2014 2:43 p.m.

    To "Atlas Smashed" and anybody else who has the misguided thought that corporations have been granted personhood and can "have a religion". Go back and read the ruling. It only applies to businesses that are owned by 1 or just a few people. Companies like GE, GM, Apple, Boeing, or any other publically traded company cannot do what the Greens have decided to do with Hobby Lobby. The SCOTUS ruling restores the right of an individual to spend his own money as he sees fit.

    You may not like it, but, as you have so often said to conservatives "its the law, so suck it up."

    To "The Real Maverick" Does Viagra kill innocent children? That is all that the Greens are standing up for. I read today where the Greens pay for hormone treatments for transgenderd people going through sex change operations.

    Again, the issue is killing a developing baby, not sex.

    Your ilk would impose socialism or communism, which would make the current corporate structure look like paradise.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    July 17, 2014 2:50 p.m.

    We Liberal may support America's Unions, Mark my words Corporations are EVERYTHING we've been prophesied and warned about.

    IRS application requirement for a union to organize as a labor organization exempt from federal income tax. Each application for exemption must be accompanied by an exact copy of the organization's organizing document: Articles of incorporation for a corporation.

    IMO you support unions, and in the same paragraph you tell us they are everything we have been warned about. Unions are corporations. Tax exempt status does not make it any less than the corporation it is. Please reconcile the inconsistency in the argument you presented. My last post so other than what I presented I can't comment any further.

    Happy Valley Heretic
    "Newspapers are specifically mentioned by name"

    The clause is directed toward the free speech of individuals. The Free Press Clause protects the right of individuals to express themselves through publication of information. It does not distinguish or identify corporate owned newspapers specifically by name

    Others can discuss how the Court rejected the "suggestion that communication by corporate members of the institutional press is entitled to greater protection than the same communication by non-institutional-press businesses.

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    July 17, 2014 2:58 p.m.

    @Atlas Smashed:
    "That's not what then out ruled."

    Whaaat?

    "The court ruled that corporations have religious beliefs."

    Not so. The court ruled that owners of closely held corporations can exercise religious beliefs in what they spend business resources on. Closely held corporations are treated more like LLP's.

    "Gee, thanks Supreme Court for opening this can of worms."

    Are you confusing this ruling with SSM rulings?

    @The Real Maverick:
    "So why is Viagra still covered?"

    Didn't know it was. Of course, it shouldn't be.

    "If they really want to live their religion, then they would give up all their child labor made Chinese junk."

    In which case you might not have a computer to type your comments on.

    "In fact, why not get rid of the whole corporation model?"

    You want chaos in the business world?

    "I'd love to get back to small businesses."

    Our economy would collapse. Can you imagine a ma & pa store down the street manufacturing steamships, army tanks, 747's, etc.?

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    July 17, 2014 4:06 p.m.

    @Redshirt1701
    "Does Viagra kill innocent children? That is all that the Greens are standing up for."
    Um, no, they aren't, considering that none of the birth control listed in the SCOTUS ruling would kill a fetus. Abortions(regardless of the method) aren't mandated to be covered by the ACA. Birth control pills work by creating hormonal conditions that prevent a womans egg from being fertilized. Abortions kill the fetus. There is a huge difference.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    July 17, 2014 4:25 p.m.

    To "Noodlekaboodle" go back and read what the Greens have said. Go to the USA Today article "Hobby Lobby case: What birth control is affected?" It clearly states "The companies in the case and their supporters object to IUDs and morning-after pills, saying they cause abortions by blocking a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. Groups that lobby for reproductive rights contend the drugs and devices prevent fertilization from occurring, which can lead to unwanted pregnancies and surgical abortions." Tell me what is the difference between killing a fetus when it is 100 cells vs 1 million cells? Killing a child is still killing a child.

    That is what the Greens have said all along. The drugs in question abort babies through various means.

  • a bit of reality Shawnee Mission, KS
    July 17, 2014 4:34 p.m.

    Mike Richards,

    Nobody has argued on this thread that corporations are evil. They've argued that the Bill of Rights was intended to grant rights or recognize rights of individual human beings (i.e. persons). People have freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

    Just because I don't think the founding fathers intended to grant corporations freedom of religion doesn't mean I am against corporations.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    July 17, 2014 5:32 p.m.

    MY the left is silly.

    The courts never said corporations are a person.

    What the courts have said is people have rights no matter how they assemble themselves,

    Whether it be a union, a church, a organization, a club, any form of assembl;age, and yes, even a corporation.

    And show me where in the first amendment where it delineates who or what get rights. The rights are a blanket right, and congress must not and is it not allowed to abridge them.

    So please can we stop this silliness.

    It is not up to the left or congress who gets rights.

    We the people already have them, they are God-given rights, we the people have them in the first place, no matter how we organize ourselves.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    July 17, 2014 6:38 p.m.

    My dog has always wanted to be a human. So if I incorporate him, he will become a "person," right?

  • gmlewis Houston, TX
    July 17, 2014 7:38 p.m.

    Mike Richards has written some very insightful comments on this article, and I agree with his thoughts.

    When a famous person said 'Corporations are people," I think he was saying that corporations are legally organized groups of individual human beings.

    I don't think you can incorporate your dog ... but you could form a corporation yourself and then employ your dog. Of course, you may have to pay income taxes on what your dog earns. (That, of course, would be an example of an evil corporation, since it enslaves the dog.)

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 17, 2014 8:14 p.m.

    “I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”
    —U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864
    (letter to Col. William F. Elkins)

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 17, 2014 8:19 p.m.

    "I hope we shall take warning from the example and crush in it’s birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and to bid defiance to the laws of their country."--Thomas Jefferson

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    July 17, 2014 9:51 p.m.

    When Texas executes one. It's a valid point, a differentiation between a person who can take responsibility for their actions versus an organisation that cannot. Or when one versus the other can have 'justice' imposed upon them.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    July 17, 2014 10:28 p.m.

    Closely held Corporate Manifesto:

    When closely held corporations begin paying the tax rates real people pay, I will consider a closely held corporation to be a real person.

    When a closely held corporation offers the opening or closing prayers at Church, I will consider a closely held corporation to be a real person.

    When Mitt Romney is elected the POTUS, I will consider that corporations are people, my friend.

  • Arm of Orion Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 18, 2014 11:10 a.m.

    Fun fact Viagra is used to treat hypertension as well as ED. Just as an FYI.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    July 18, 2014 11:48 a.m.

    Corporations have been deemed legal persons going all the way back to the Middle Ages. The first U.S. Supreme Court decision recognizing the doctrine of corporate personhood, and that corporations are protected by the rights enumerated in the Constitution, was decided in 1819.

    This is not hard. People like Mr. Kayser really have no excuse for remaining ignorant.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    July 18, 2014 11:50 a.m.

    "When closely held corporations begin paying the tax rates real people pay, I will consider a closely held corporation to be a real person."

    They do. Higher, actually. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the entire developed world.

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    July 18, 2014 11:52 a.m.

    Geez Louise Richards. Who said there is no place for corporations? They just are getting all the rights and are absolved from the same consequences of their actions as the individuals are. If I kill 13 people by my negligence I am thrown in jail. They do it they get a slap on the wrist and a fine that is minimal in relationship to their income. BTW, since you are such an expert Constitutionalist, where does it say that SCOTUS can make laws? Read it.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    July 18, 2014 11:54 a.m.

    "By the court's ruling, corporations no longer have to abide by the EPA, not discriminate Mormons, or even pay salaries if it's against their "religious beliefs."

    Not true.

    The Hobby Lobby and Conestoga decisions held that under RFRA (legislation passed by a bipartisan 97-3 majority in the Senate, and unanimously in the House, and signed by Bill Clinton), legislative acts that impose undue burdens on sincerely held religious beliefs are subject to strict scrutiny -- a judicial term which means that the measure must be the least restrictive means available to accomplish a significant government interest -- and that this rule applies to people who do business as closely-held corporations as well as as sole proprietorships, since RFRA did not alter the U.S. Code's standard definition of "person" as including corporations.

    But that's too complex for the average partisan, so go on with your "war on women" silliness.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 18, 2014 4:42 p.m.

    @Kayser,
    How long ago did Lincoln say that?... 150 years ago? And has the Republic been destroyed? Nope.

    Have the rich people even TRIED to destroy the republic... or to help it? I think many have tried to HELP it.

    IMO you don't need to be so afraid of money, or people with money. Many people do GOOD with money.

    But you SHOULD be wary of EVIL people with money (who have already destroyed countries and currency (like George Soros in Hungary and in England) (The man who broke the Bank of England, and reference his Insider trading conviction in 1988 as well if you think he's a "good guy").

    Not every person with money is "evil". But some are...

    I like the historical perspective though. The country has been through a lot of bad times since then, and a lot of GOOD times. Seems like the people with money are usually instrumental in both.

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    July 18, 2014 10:50 p.m.

    @ugottabkidn:
    "If I kill 13 people by my negligence I am thrown in jail. They do it they get a slap on the wrist and a fine that is minimal in relationship to their income."

    Corporations can't kill. They exist only as ink markings on a piece of paper.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    July 18, 2014 10:51 p.m.

    The hysteria behind the entire boogie man of "corporations are not people" comes from a Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission court case; where the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting political expenditures by corporations, associations, or labor unions.

    The FEC had allowed Michel Moore's film Fahrenheit 911 to be shown during elections, but banned Hillary; The Movie as being political speech. The hypocrisy is obvious and the court rightly ruled in favor of more, not less, free speech. Much to the chagrin of the fashionably intolerant who believe that free speech only applies to them and their politically correct causes

    It is ironic that the same leftists who whine about corporate speech, support union speech; those who support Apple or Costco having a social conscious, come unglued at the idea that Hobby Lobby might also have one.

    This letter, and the support from the usual suspects, is a classic Orwellian case of anti free speech hypocrisy and hate. If corporations have no free speech - then who is next.

    Being anti-free speech is illiberal, but typical left wing. Which is why high-information voters have such a healthy distrust of political correctness.

  • J in AZ San Tan Valley, AZ
    July 19, 2014 1:21 p.m.

    FedEx was indicted on Thursday for trafficking in illegal drugs. The corporation could be indicted separately from the employees who actually committed the crimes because of the 'juridical person' principle. Under the law for this purpose, FedEx is a 'person' in the eyes of the court. If a corporation can be prosecuted s a person, then justice demands that corporations also receive some of the legal protections that live human beings get.

  • Mister J Salt Lake City, UT
    July 20, 2014 3:57 p.m.

    To Mike R

    I got the impression that you were belived in strict & literal interpretations of COTUS. Hmmm!? I was wrong.

    in regards to jsf

    (("I'll beleive that corporations are people as soon as Texas executes one." a bit of reality States and Texas also do execute corporations, by revoking their charters to operate. Happens all the time. So does this mean you believe they are people now.))

    So, there are alot of business incorporated in Delaware. If Texas executes on them (pun intended); does the Civil War start up again?

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    July 20, 2014 8:18 p.m.

    SCFan,

    How could you not know that corporations are not people. They are pools of assets for the government can take from whenever people do not want to pay for the goodies they get from Uncle Sugar Daddy Sam. The government wants money, just take 35% of all of the profits of the corporation. (Note that when you have a loss The government wants health care for all but does not to pay for it. Legislate that the corporate money tree has to pay. Tell the corporation who it has to hire, who it cannot fire. What it has to pay for salaries.

    The mantra during the American Revolution was no taxation with representation. I have no problem with corporations not being able to contribute to politicians, just as soon as progressives cannot use corporations as their own personal piggy banks.

    Note that none of these people were protesting the massive amounts unions donate. The left is all for free speech - as long as they agree with its content.

    Also where were all of these people when unions were giving money to politicians. FreeThat was OK because they all lean left.

  • stevan madrigal murray, UT
    July 21, 2014 4:52 p.m.

    “Corporations are people, my friend,” Mitt Romney,Iowa State Fair, Aug. 2011

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    July 22, 2014 6:55 a.m.

    let's go all the way with this. We need to make corporation declare citizenship and male or female so their mergers can be declined on moral grounds.

    Let's have it YOUR way for everyone.