Voting rights, free speech and corporate personhood

In the recent case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) the U.S. Supreme Court reached one of the most egregious decisions in U.S. judicial history, one that will return to plague us in the election campaign season of 2010.

The Citizen United decision eclipses Bush v. Gore (2000) in ideological “activism,� a case which, you will recall, held that while you or I have a constitutional right to vote, we do not necessarily have the federally protected right to have that vote counted or re-counted, especially if state mismanagement of vote counting, combined with citizens’ fears of uncertainty of outcome, make it preferable to cease counting and decide the election outcome (in this case by 5 to 4 vote) in December, in spite of the fact that the U.S. Constitution itself anticipates the situation “if a president shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term� (the following January). So much for Constitutional framers’ intent.

Former President Bill Clinton writes in his autobiography, “My Life� (Barnes & Noble 2004): “If Gore had been ahead in the vote count and Bush behind, there’s no doubt that the Supreme Court would have voted 9 to 0 to recount the vote. Bush v.Gore will go down in history as one of the worst decisions the Supreme Court ever made, along with the Dred Scott case.�

We might remind ourselves that the case of Scott v. Sanford (1857) involved a former slave, freed by his master and taken to a free territory where slavery was prohibited by statute. Scott, however, was arrested on a train and denied his civil rights. In response, Dred Scott brought suit in the Missouri Circuit Court to recover his freedom. The Supreme Court held, as subsequently reported, that “The Negro was not included, and not intended to be included, under the word ‘citizen’ in the Constitution, and therefore could claim none of the rights and privileges secured to citizens of the United States.�

Now comes Citizens United. The case involves a political action corporation that sought to air and promote a TV film vilifying Hillary Clinton during the primary season last year, 2009, in explicit violation of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Act (2002), which prohibited corporations and unions from broadcasting “electioneering communication� (for or against a particular candidate) within 60 days of an election or 30 days of a primary. The McCain-Feingold Act had been previously upheld by both the FEC and the federal district court.

The Supreme Court could have resolved the case on narrower grounds, but instead, by vote of 5 to 4, the court decided more broadly that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts cannot be limited, because corporations are “persons� enjoying “personhood,� with Constitutional rights of “equal protection� and “free speech,� and, as stated in Buckley v. Valeo (1976), money is speech.

Really? Funny, the Constitution says nothing about this. Perhaps not all “equals� are truly equal. It is no longer clear whether your or my puny campaign contributions are still subject to limits, but the Supreme Court has made it clear that the floodgates are now open for corporations and their paid lobbyists to spend unlimited millions of dollars attacking and/or supporting candidates for political office.

This self-styled “non-activist� Supreme Court majority misinterpreted and overturned the long-standing precedents of a string of cases leading up to Santa Clara v. Southern Railroad (1886), Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990), and McConnell v. FEC (2003), just to name three. The Citizens United opinion renders nugatory the Tillman Act (1907), which banned corporate contributions to federal candidates, as well as the Taft Hartley Act (1947), which limited both corporations and unions equally, just to be fair. Finally, of course, Citizens United leaves McCain-Feingold in shambles. Naturally, John McCain is horrified.

Justices Kennedy, Roberts and Alito found justification, they thought, in a straightforward reading of the text of the U.S. Constitution, affirming the sanctity of “free speech.� The fact that corporations are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution, in connection with either “persons� or “free speech,� did not seem to matter. The majority never answered dissenting Justice John Paul Stevens’ question: “Does the First Amendment permit any distinction between corporate speakers and individual speakers?� The Constitution clearly refers to individual, natural, human speakers, that is “persons,� not corporations. This doesn’t mean corporations do not have rights allowed them by the public. But corporate rights do not trump citizens’ rights.

Originally, the idea that corporations were “persons� was in the sense that corporations had standing to sue, or be sued, in the courts of law. However, corporations were seen from the beginning as artificial creations, existing at the will and forbearance of the public. If corporations were entitled to all the rights of natural persons, then they should be subject to all the responsibilities of natural persons. Let’s take a closer look, and ask a few questions to see whether this is true.

Do corporations have a Constitutional right to vote? Should they? How many votes would they get?

Should corporations be drafted into the military? How many executives, employees or shareholders should serve? Could we send them all off to Iraq?

Do corporations have the right to bear arms? Rifles? Nuclear weapons?

Do corporations serve on juries as civilian persons do?

Can corporations run for political office? If born in America, could General Electric or General Motors be elected president of the United States?

Should corporations be stripped of their legal and tax benefits that are not available to private persons?

Should corporations convicted of felonies be shut down and all members imprisoned?

And, oh yes, can anyone explain how a person can be owned, as a corporation is?

Yes, corporate speech is speech of a sort. But why should such speech be the most constitutionally protected “free speech,� immune to regulation, merely because the speaker is a corporation? Why did the Supreme Court fail to mention the protection of free speech of real persons whose rights really are enshrined in the Constitution? When a corporation pays money to a legislator to enact legislation, is that protected “free speech� or is it a bribe?

What if the speech were knowingly, deliberately and viciously false and defamatory, as it was in the Citizens United attack on Hillary Clinton? Would such hate speech be beyond reasonable, rational regulation, simply because the speaker is a corporation?

Was America founded “by and for the people� or “by and for the corporations�? Isn’t there something wrong with the Supreme Court’s majority view of democracy?

President Barack Obama said of the Citizens United decision: “This ruling strikes at our democracy itself,� and “I can’t think of anything more devastating to the public interest.� He added: “I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities.�

The Achilles’ heel of the Supreme Court decision is precisely that it gives foreign-owned corporations more influence over U.S. elections than ordinary American citizens have. This glaring defect is the entry key by which legislators in Congress can begin to roll back the noxious impact of Citizens United, and restore democracy, putting control back into the hands of the American people, where the Constitution says it should be. We have to start working on this right now, to regulate corporate behavior and save capitalism from itself. The time is short. The electoral campaign season starts soon and ends in November 2010.

Sharon resident Anthony Piel is a former director and general legal counsel of the World Health Organization.

Latest News

Robert J. Pallone

NORFOLK — Robert J. Pallone, 69, of Perkins Street passed away April 12, 2024, at St. Vincent Medical Center. He was a loving, eccentric CPA. He was kind and compassionate. If you ever needed anything, Bob would be right there. He touched many lives and even saved one.

Bob was born Feb. 5, 1955, in Torrington, the son of the late Joseph and Elizabeth Pallone.

Keep ReadingShow less
The artistic life of Joelle Sander

"Flowers" by the late artist and writer Joelle Sander.

Cornwall Library

The Cornwall Library unveiled its latest art exhibition, “Live It Up!,” showcasing the work of the late West Cornwall resident Joelle Sander on Saturday, April 13. The twenty works on canvas on display were curated in partnership with the library with the help of her son, Jason Sander, from the collection of paintings she left behind to him. Clearly enamored with nature in all its seasons, Sander, who split time between her home in New York City and her country house in Litchfield County, took inspiration from the distinctive white bark trunks of the area’s many birch trees, the swirling snow of Connecticut’s wintery woods, and even the scenic view of the Audubon in Sharon. The sole painting to depict fauna is a melancholy near-abstract outline of a cow, rootless in a miasma haze of plum and Persian blue paint. Her most prominently displayed painting, “Flowers,” effectively builds up layers of paint so that her flurry of petals takes on a three-dimensional texture in their rough application, reminiscent of another Cornwall artist, Don Bracken.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Seder to savor in Sheffield

Rabbi Zach Fredman

Zivar Amrami

On April 23, Race Brook Lodge in Sheffield will host “Feast of Mystics,” a Passover Seder that promises to provide ecstasy for the senses.

“’The Feast of Mystics’ was a title we used for events back when I was running The New Shul,” said Rabbi Zach Fredman of his time at the independent creative community in the West Village in New York City.

Keep ReadingShow less
Art scholarship now honors HVRHS teacher Warren Prindle

Warren Prindle

Patrick L. Sullivan

Legendary American artist Jasper Johns, perhaps best known for his encaustic depictions of the U.S. flag, formed the Foundation for Contemporary Arts in 1963, operating the volunteer-run foundation in his New York City artist studio with the help of his co-founder, the late American composer and music theorist John Cage. Although Johns stepped down from his chair position in 2015, today the Foundation for Community Arts continues its pledge to sponsor emerging artists, with one of its exemplary honors being an $80 thousand dollar scholarship given to a graduating senior from Housatonic Valley Regional High School who is continuing his or her visual arts education on a college level. The award, first established in 2004, is distributed in annual amounts of $20,000 for four years of university education.

In 2024, the Contemporary Visual Arts Scholarship was renamed the Warren Prindle Arts Scholarship. A longtime art educator and mentor to young artists at HVRHS, Prindle announced that he will be retiring from teaching at the end of the 2023-24 school year. Recently in 2022, Prindle helped establish the school’s new Kearcher-Monsell Gallery in the library and recruited a team of student interns to help curate and exhibit shows of both student and community-based professional artists. One of Kearcher-Monsell’s early exhibitions featured the work of Theda Galvin, who was later announced as the 2023 winner of the foundation’s $80,000 scholarship. Prindle has also championed the continuation of the annual Blue and Gold juried student art show, which invites the public to both view and purchase student work in multiple mediums, including painting, photography, and sculpture.

Keep ReadingShow less