(Article, quoting Jim McGovern)
"I think the Constitution is wrong. I don't think money … equals free speech. I don't think corporations should have the same equality as a regular voter."
Actually, after you filter for misstatements, ignorance, and just plain dumbness, he has a point.
As other posters and the author point out, artificial persons (corporations, partnerships, etc.) need a form of legal personhood in order to transact their affairs.
They just don't necessarily need first class, full citizenship.
And in fact, the Supreme Court has never, ever addressed the question of corporate rights. Rather, an ambitious and corrupt Associate Justice and the Clerk of the Supreme Court finagled an interpolation of an 1880's tax case (involving the Central Pacific RR and a California county's taxing power) in the epitome of the case written by the clerk. The point incorporated in the syllabus of the case by the Clerk of the Court, that corporations enjoy all of the rights inuring to live persons, was pure fiction and fraud, and was not at all in the holding of the Court. This mischief was undetected by the Chief Justice, who was already abed with his terminal illness.
> They just don’t necessarily need first class, full citizenship.
Then that would have to apply to every corporate body, including the Press, the Unions, the Churches, and any other body of individuals coming together to express a purpose.
I don’t think we want to go there.
I think it’s very good that the DemonRATS are going there. It exposes them for the totalitarian statists that they are.