127 Reasons Why Reversing Citizens United is NOT Enough

[unhappycamper]

http://www.opednews.com/articles/127-Reasons-Why-Reversing-by-Greg-Coleridge-130509-202.html



127 Reasons Why Reversing Citizens United is NOT Enough
By Greg Coleridge
OpEdNews Op Eds 5/9/2013 at 21:22:50

127.

That's the number of years corporations, artificial legal creations of government, have possessed inalienable rights protected by the U.S. Constitution.

The idea that corporations are "persons" with constitutional rights is a radical concept concocted by the Supreme Court based on a fraud 127 years ago -- 124 years before the Citizens United vs FEC Supreme Court decision in 2010. On May 10, 1886, the Santa Clara vs. Southern Pacific Railroad decision established that a railroad corporation possessed equal protection "rights" identical to living human beings under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The 14th Amendment was a post-Civil War decision specifically intended to apply to freed slaves.

Santa Clara is often attributed as the pillar of all corporate rights cases, including Citizens United . Yet the Supreme Court never actually concluded that corporations were legal persons. Chief Justice Morrison Waite (from Ohio) said the case settled no constitutional issues. Nevertheless, that exact conclusion was placed by the Court Reporter in the "headnotes," or brief summary, at the beginning of the case. Many members of the Court at the time agreed with the sentiment that corporations were persons but the text itself did not actually address corporate personhood. The case only dealt with taxes on railroad fences.

[yurbud]

1. we can either reverse corporate personhood or make corporations truly democratic

one person one vote for each employee and each investor, regardless of rank in the hierarchy or size of investment.