I am not a lawyer. I do not play a lawyer on TV. I do sit in an armchair and pretend to be a lawyer from that vantage point. Twenty years of Law & Order must be better than three years in law school. So, with this expansive legal training and experience in mind, I offer a few thoughts on the recent Citizens United case recently decided by SCOTUS (that’s the lawyers’ way of saying Supreme Court of the United States).
Now, for those who do not know, corporations are “persons” under the law. What this case does is grant them rights; especially as it pertains to the First Amendment, the freedom of speech. I do not think one can argue against the logic. Persons in America have rights. Corporations are persons. Ipso facto, they have rights (the Latin proves I know law, or I am a doctor.)
I do not think you can argue against the proposition. One may, and perhaps should, attack the underlying premise that corporations are persons, but that case is so old, why bring up the past? Anyway, we all agree that the First Amendment is a good thing, so you do not want to take that away, it would just be un-American. Corporations already enjoy so many rights of personhood, why should speech be any different? Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, GE, et. al. bear arms, people worship at the Church of Disney, no one has been able to seize or search anything from Xe, né Blackwater, or the banks.
I think we should grant corporations all the rights of persons. In exchange, they carry all the responsibilities of persons. They get the same tax breaks we do. We can try them for murder; one thinks of Xe or KBR. The question of corporate marriages becomes more difficult. Must they be married by corporate priests, or can a human do the ceremony? Can a corporation and human marry, being both persons under the law? Of course, corporations of the same gender are not currently allowed to wed. I can hear the objections now: “Corporations have no gender.” That is nonsense. As persons, they have a gender that is innate and immutable. Anyone can look at a corporation and see how manly it is. To argue otherwise is to give into liberal, postmodern, intellectual mumbo jumbo of gender as a social construct. Can you imagine any company but Xe in Iraq? KBR is not going to make a damsel in distress movie.
The Citizens United case is an important foray into establishing rights and responsibilities for all persons in the United States. Without “persons,” this country would not function. Just make sure you do not ask about immigrants, documented or not, because we are not really sure if they are persons. Oh, and Guantanamo, we just own and control, we have no ability to apply the law there, so there are no persons.
