Makes sense to me.Originally Posted by SCOTUS
From what I see, corporate personhood is tangential to the issue. Corporations are, simply put, associations of citizens and there's no constitutional basis for denying these groups First Amendment rights. The decision isn't saying that corporations get First Amendment protection because they are corporations- it's saying that free speech can't be denied on the basis of being a corporation as opposed to any other group of citizens.
I'm glad to see McCain-Feingold weakened.
edit:
It's worth noting that the corporation in this decision was a non-profit.![]()
Bookmarks