STOP CORPORATIONS FROM CO-OPTING HUMANS' POLITICAL SPEECH RIGHTS
Congress must reestablish its Constitutional authority over Corporations if our democracy is to survive. The 2020 Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision pointed out the constitutional regulatory mechanism Congress must use to do it. Congress people must find the courage to do whatever it takes to make it law.
Lawlessness allows Corporations to invest unlimited amounts of money in a Congress willing to govern humans to satisfy corporate ambitions. This unwarranted interference is overwhelming Congress's ability to act in the best interests of human persons. Corporations have no more loyalty to the welfare of the citizens of this country than foreign countries do.
Congress has both the power and a duty to repair the structural damage done to our democracy when the 2005 Citizens United decision was misinterpreted into meaning corporations had inherent inalienable human rights as far as the Constitution is concerned.
Citizens United overstated a Corporation's relationship to the Constitution when it "...reaffirmed the First Amendment principle that the Government lacks the power to restrict political speech based on the speaker's corporate identity." Hobby Lobby made it clear that all Corporate rights are derived from their humans' rights. "...when rights, whether constitutional or statutory, are extended to corporations, the purpose is to protect the rights of these people." ("shareholders, officers, and employees")". Corporations are still just fictional persons whose rights are dependent upon whatever legislatures are willing to authorize shareholders to grant to their corporation in their charters. Citizens United reaffirmed that "... in 1791 (as now) corporations could pursue only the objectives set forth in their charters."
The Hobby Lobby Court found it necessary to first determine whether Congress intended to put a corporation's owners "to the choice" either "give up their (corporations) right to seek judicial protection of their religious liberty or forgo the benefits of operating as a corporation." From this it follows that Congress also has the power to give shareholders a choice between extending their right to political free speech to their corporation and not having the privilege of limited liability for themselves. Limited Liability is a privilege not a right which the government may or may not grant under whatever conditions it sees fit.
When a Corporation ventures outside the jurisdiction which created it, Congress has Commerce Clause authority to dictate the charter restrictions shareholders must accept to remain a corporation.
Congress will restore its authority over corporations by requiring them to recharter themselves to include an affirmative ban on political expenditures as a precondition for recognizing stockholder's limited liability in Federal Courts.
This measure does not conflict with Citizens United. The owner's right is not being restricted. It is being voluntarily exchanged for a valuable consideration. It does not "fine or jail associations of citizens". No government enforcement is needed. The possibility of losing limited liability alone is enough to subject shareholders to a stock market imposed capital punishment.
The largest stockholders can still promote their political ideologies elsewhere. They only loose the advantage of sharing that cost with smaller stockholders who may not share their views.
Corporations would still be free to communicate their political concerns to their human shareholders, who may or may not take independent political action based on them.
Congress person, put our democracy back on the right side of history. End corporate political expenditures.
The author can be contacted at DGLSKEOGH@GMAIL.COM
Lawlessness allows Corporations to invest unlimited amounts of money in a Congress willing to govern humans to satisfy corporate ambitions. This unwarranted interference is overwhelming Congress's ability to act in the best interests of human persons. Corporations have no more loyalty to the welfare of the citizens of this country than foreign countries do.
Congress has both the power and a duty to repair the structural damage done to our democracy when the 2005 Citizens United decision was misinterpreted into meaning corporations had inherent inalienable human rights as far as the Constitution is concerned.
Citizens United overstated a Corporation's relationship to the Constitution when it "...reaffirmed the First Amendment principle that the Government lacks the power to restrict political speech based on the speaker's corporate identity." Hobby Lobby made it clear that all Corporate rights are derived from their humans' rights. "...when rights, whether constitutional or statutory, are extended to corporations, the purpose is to protect the rights of these people." ("shareholders, officers, and employees")". Corporations are still just fictional persons whose rights are dependent upon whatever legislatures are willing to authorize shareholders to grant to their corporation in their charters. Citizens United reaffirmed that "... in 1791 (as now) corporations could pursue only the objectives set forth in their charters."
The Hobby Lobby Court found it necessary to first determine whether Congress intended to put a corporation's owners "to the choice" either "give up their (corporations) right to seek judicial protection of their religious liberty or forgo the benefits of operating as a corporation." From this it follows that Congress also has the power to give shareholders a choice between extending their right to political free speech to their corporation and not having the privilege of limited liability for themselves. Limited Liability is a privilege not a right which the government may or may not grant under whatever conditions it sees fit.
When a Corporation ventures outside the jurisdiction which created it, Congress has Commerce Clause authority to dictate the charter restrictions shareholders must accept to remain a corporation.
Congress will restore its authority over corporations by requiring them to recharter themselves to include an affirmative ban on political expenditures as a precondition for recognizing stockholder's limited liability in Federal Courts.
This measure does not conflict with Citizens United. The owner's right is not being restricted. It is being voluntarily exchanged for a valuable consideration. It does not "fine or jail associations of citizens". No government enforcement is needed. The possibility of losing limited liability alone is enough to subject shareholders to a stock market imposed capital punishment.
The largest stockholders can still promote their political ideologies elsewhere. They only loose the advantage of sharing that cost with smaller stockholders who may not share their views.
Corporations would still be free to communicate their political concerns to their human shareholders, who may or may not take independent political action based on them.
Congress person, put our democracy back on the right side of history. End corporate political expenditures.
The author can be contacted at DGLSKEOGH@GMAIL.COM
View Comments