[at-l] OT - Freedom of Speech was Snowshoeing VS Hiking

[David Addleton]

I don't "get" the logic of the Volokh Conspiracy blog to which you linked.

If I understand it correctly, the author says we have individual
rights protected by the constitution, and since these rights are
unfettered individually, they should also be unfettered when we
organize ourselves as corporations; otherwise, if we limit corporate
rights, we'll inexorably limit our individual rights.

This makes no logical sense to me.

Our individual rights protected by the constitution are not unfettered
rights: all our "rights" are circumscribed: even our individual right
to assemble and speak freely, is regulated in time, place, and manner.
Individually. Never mind when organize. Our right to "assemble" is
limited by the constitution solely to the end of petitioning the
government: it isn't absolute. So, our individual rights are already
circumscribed, and regulating the corporate organization isn't going
to change that one bit. It's foolish to think otherwise.

So the premise, imho, is false to begin with.







On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 8:24 PM, Jim and_or Ginny Owen
<spiriteagle99 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I won't be answering any particular post here - and in fact, I'm of two
> minds about this
> subject. But I think there's a lot of misunderstanding about WHY the
> decision was made.
> So I'm gonna drop a few selected quotes from a legal blog and let you think
> about them.
> Which is what I'm doing - thinking about them.
>
> These quotes are not an expression of "my" opinion.  Nor are they an
> argument in favor
> of the decision.  They ARE something that I've not heard argued by anybody
> here or on
> any other hiking forum yet. And they NEED to be considered before too many
> people
> shoot from the lip here. So....
>
>>One of the standard arguments put forward by critics of the Supreme Court’s
>> decision
>>protecting corporate political speech in Citizens United is that people
>> aren’t entitled to
>>constitutional rights when they use corporate resources because
>> corporations are
>>“state-created entities.”
>
>>On this view, the government would be free to censor the New York Times,
>> Fox News,
>>the Nation, National Review, and so on. Nearly every newspaper and
>> political journal in
>>the country is a corporation.
>
>>If people using state-created entities don’t have free speech rights, they
>> don’t have
>>any other constitutional rights either. After all, the supposed power to
>> define the rights
>>of state-created entities isn’t limited to free speech rights. Thus,
>> government would not
>>be bound by the Fourth Amendment in searching corporate property (including
>> employee
>>offices). It could take corporate property for private use without paying
>> compensation
>>because the Fifth Amendment would no longer apply. It could forbid
>> religious services on
>>corporate property (including that owned by churches, most of which are
>> after all nonprofit
>>corporations). If the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment doesn’t
>> apply to corporate
>>property, neither does the Free Exercise Clause. And so on.
>
>>So government could enact laws requiring citizens to limit their political
>> speech in exactly
>>the same ways in which corporate speech can be limited (or at least
>> condition their continued
>>status as citizens on obedience to the government’s censorship rules).
>
> Read the whole thing -
> http://volokh.com/2010/01/22/should-people-acting-through-corporations-be-denied-constitutional-rights-because-corporations-are-state-created-entities/
>
> Finally - regardless of your agreement or disagreement, the decision was
> made.  Regardless of
> the rhetoric from Obama, Senators, Congressmen, governors, whatever -  the
> decision was made.
> And like Roe vs Wade, regardless of agreement or opposition, it's now the
> law of the land and we
> all get to live with it.  There is no legislative "fix".  There is no
> administrative "fix".  Anyone who
> tells you there is - is simply lying.  At least until this country becomes a
> dictatorship.
>
> Walk softly,
> Jim
>
> http://www.spiriteaglehome.com/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> at-l mailing list
> at-l at backcountry.net
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
>
>