Citizens United, Corporate Personhood, and Corporate Power: The Tension between Constitutional Law and Corporate Law

Ripken, Susanna Kim

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2134465

Cited by 3 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…When the question of constitutional rights arises, the concept of corporate personhood is also applied inconsistently and contextually. The Supreme Court has extended to corporations Fifth Amendment double jeopardy rights, Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, and First Amendment rights to free speech, but it has denied them Fifth Amendment protection against self‐incrimination (Epps ; Ripken ; Schragger ). In essence, corporate personhood has not been overtly defined in the Constitution and is an expedient legal convenience, not a matter of logic and reasoning (Ripken ).…”

Section: Citizens United V Fec (2010) Decisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Supreme Court has extended to corporations Fifth Amendment double jeopardy rights, Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, and First Amendment rights to free speech, but it has denied them Fifth Amendment protection against self‐incrimination (Epps ; Ripken ; Schragger ). In essence, corporate personhood has not been overtly defined in the Constitution and is an expedient legal convenience, not a matter of logic and reasoning (Ripken ). Ripken () argues that corporate personhood is a conclusion that flows from analyzing legal rights in a particular context, not a beginning point from whence conclusions are made.…”

Section: Citizens United V Fec (2010) Decisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A clarion call of injustice from populist organizations, such as “Occupy” and “Move to Amend” (Clements ; Johnson ; Lamoreaux and Novak ; Reclaim Democracy ; Ripken ), has raised concern that anthropomorphic “rights” for profit‐driven corporations are destructive to governmental democracy. The impetus for these movements springs from the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission () decision.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Legal analysts have described the intent of protest groups as deficient in an understanding of the fine points and nuances of the Supreme Court decision (Epps ; Ripken ; Tores‐Spelliscy ; Williamson ). Indeed, the majority decision did not rely on corporate personhood as the basis of its findings (Ripken ); instead, it found that free speech in and of itself is the paramount issue, with the identity of the speaker being irrelevant in this instance (558 U.S. 31, 2010). Nevertheless, the lengthy dissenting opinion of Justice Stevens decried the extension of free speech rights in this case because of the myriad ways a corporation differs from a “natural person” (dissent, 558 U.S. 28, 558 U.S. 46, 2010; Johnson ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Corporate Personhood and Corporate Political Spending: Implications for Shareholders

Nemetz

2016

Business and Society Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) decision, the Supreme Court rendered an opinion verifying the legality of unions and corporations to spend funds from their general treasuries to finance independent expenditures related to political and electioneering communications. Such speech and communications are constitutionally protected by the First Amendment, according to Justice Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion (558 U.S. 22, 2010). The dissenting opinion questioned whether such rights should accrue to corporations, since corporations differ from constitutionally‐protected “natural persons” (dissent, 558 U.S. 50 at 2, 2010; Johnson 2011). The decision ignited a firestorm of controversy, which renewed interest in the legal concept of corporate personhood. This article reviews key findings in the Citizens United v. FEC case, then describes the historical, legal, and theoretical concepts of corporate personhood with the goal of unbundling the nuanced consequences of the majority and dissenting opinions of the Citizens United v. FEC case. The analysis then turns to a shareholder perspective, with particular emphasis on the implications for shareholders’ rights and responsibilities. It concludes with an exploration of options available to shareholders concerned about how to respond when a corporation uses its resources to communicate political opinions at odds with their own.

show abstract

Section: Citizens United V Fec (2010) Decisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Citizens United V Fec (2010) Decisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Corporate Personhood and Corporate Political Spending: Implications for Shareholders

Nemetz

2016

Business and Society Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Repensando los derechos constitucionales de la persona jurídica a la luz del Obamacare

González¹

2018

Rev. Estud. Polít.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

La titularidad de la libertad religiosa para las corporaciones con ánimo de lucro fue el tema central discutido en el emblemático caso de la Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos Burwell v. Hobby Lobby. En un ajustado fallo de cinco votos contra cuatro, la opinión mayoritaria dictaminó la transgresión de los derechos de la primera enmienda de tres corporaciones closely held, en razón de la imposición del mandato contraceptivo, obligación impuesta en el Obamacare. Este artículo explica el contexto del caso, con especial mención a los fundamentos de la figura de la corporación en Estados Unidos, el reconocimiento de los derechos fundamentales para personas jurídicas, la posibilidad o no de ejercer la libertad religiosa y las particularidades del sistema de seguridad social estadounidense. Recoge los principales argumentos y hechos del caso, así como el análisis de sus implicaciones.

show abstract

Taking on the Corporate Determinants of Ill-health and Health Inequity: A Scoping Review of Actions to Address Excessive Corporate Power to Protect and Promote the Public’s Health

Wood,

Lacy-Nichols,

Sacks

2023

Int J Health Policy Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In many sectors of the economy, for-profit business corporations hold excessive power relative to some governments and civil society. These power imbalances have been recognised as important contributors to many pressing and complex societal challenges, including unhealthy diets, climate change, and widening socio-economic inequalities, and thus pose a major barrier to efforts to improve public health and health equity. In this paper, we reviewed potential actions for addressing excessive corporate power. Methods: We conducted a scoping review of diverse literature (using Scopus, Web of Science, HeinOnline, and EBSCO databases), along with expanded searches, to identify state and collective actions with the potential to address excessive corporate power. Actions were thematically classified into overarching strategic objectives, guided by Meagher’s ‘3Ds’ heuristic, which classifies actions to curb corporate power into three groups: dispersion, democratisation, and dissolution. Based on the actions identified, we proposed two additional strategic objectives: reform and democratise the global governance of corporations, and strengthen countervailing power structures. Results: We identified 178 documents that collectively cover a broad range of actions to address excessive corporate power. In total, 18 interrelated strategies were identified, along with several examples in which aspects of these strategies have been implemented. Conclusion: The proposed framework sheds light on how a diverse set of strategies and actions that seek to address excessive corporate power can work synergistically to change the regulatory context in which corporations operate, so that broader societal goals, including health and equity, are given much greater prominence and consideration vis-à-vis powerful corporate interests.

show abstract

Citizens United, Corporate Personhood, and Corporate Power: The Tension between Constitutional Law and Corporate Law

Abstract: public nature of President Obama's criticism of the Supreme Court's decision). 4. A Washington Post-ABC News poll indicated that "among Democrats (85 percent opposed... the ruling), Republicans (76 percent) and independents (81 percent)." Dan Eggen,

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Corporate Personhood and Corporate Political Spending: Implications for Shareholders

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Corporate Personhood and Corporate Political Spending: Implications for Shareholders

Repensando los derechos constitucionales de la persona jurídica a la luz del Obamacare

Taking on the Corporate Determinants of Ill-health and Health Inequity: A Scoping Review of Actions to Address Excessive Corporate Power to Protect and Promote the Public’s Health

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About