Log In | Register
It's not surprising to learn that no nation on earth enshrines in its constitution the right of corporate personhood.
Mila Versteeg, associate law professor at the University of Virginia, is probably the only person in the world to have read every constitution that has been written since 1946-- constitutions from 186 nations. She's not only read them, she's quantified them, in terms of the rights that they define. That was part of a project she did while at Oxford.
Is The USA The Only Nation in the World With Corporate Personhood?
Seeded on Wed Feb 8, 2012 1:46 PM EST
Article Source: OpEdNews.Com Progressive- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (11)
Yep, the USA certainly is!! :o(
- 2 votes
#1 - Wed Feb 8, 2012 1:46 PM ESTReally?
Then why does the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union include the following in Article 42?
Any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State, has a right of access to documents of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union, whatever their medium.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/treaties/dat/32007X1214/htm/C2007303EN.01000101.htm
and any natural or legal person
Emphasis on PERSON, not corporation. In Europe, a person means a human being. It is not stretched to inmate or other objects.
- 1 vote
and any natural or legal person
Emphasis on PERSON, not corporation. I
Actually, I think you should put the emphasis on OR. Two options:
1 - Natural person = human being
2 - Legal person = corporation, partnership, LLC, LP, LLP, PC, NA, etc.
Let's look farther into the sentence.
having its registered office in a Member State
What is the first pronoun in that clause? Its--the possessive form of it. When was the last time you referred to a human being as an it? It is a pronoun used to describe inanimate or other objects.
EU law recognizes corporate as persons -- legal persons.
- 1 vote
Also, there's Germany (which managed to solve what I think is your issue with Citizens United, without ending corporate personhood):
Article 19, section 3:
(3) The basic rights shall also apply to domestic artificial persons to the extent that the nature of such rights permits.
The end of that sentence really does the trick. It also doesn't change the fact that corporations are "persons" under the law.
- 1 vote
Quite a distinction, eh? How sad and pathetic this is. This is not the America I have known until this time. And I have known my Country for six plus decades.
Great point! Great article! Voted UP!
- 3 votes
#2 - Wed Feb 8, 2012 1:53 PM ESTIt's not surprising to learn that no nation on earth enshrines in its constitution the right of corporate personhood.
The United States was the only country where its citizens were brainwashed enough to allow this to happen. this is something we need to fix if we want to have a government for the people, and not for corporations.
Great seed, Ms CYPRAH.
- 4 votes
#3 - Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:16 AM ESTI wonder if Professor Versteeg looked at the U.S. Constitution, without taking into account the Citizens United decision, if he would have seen the Corporate Personhood in that document?
To a greater or lesser degree, Corporations MUST have certain rights under the law, simply to do business. The problem is that our Supreme Court got it WRONG in the Citizens United case. They didn't have to give Corporations ALL of the rights of people under the Constitution and it was rediculous to do that. Our problem isn't in the Constitution. Our problem is a stupid interpretation of the document.
- 3 votes
#4 - Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:19 AM ESTYou're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
