Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (136793)	4/17/2010 11:36:04 AM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543429

You know, right, that the "person" referred to here is a legal fiction. The question is whether the legal entity of a "Corporation" is entitled to some of the same legal rights as an "individual" entity. Corporations have legal rights also. For whatever legal reason (haven't read the decision), the SC decided those legal rights extended to being able to contribute money to a political campaign. I do believe there is Federal Statute involved that describes/proscribes the limitations of campaign contributions, and the SC would probably be interpreting the "intent" of this statute against whether this corporate participation was in anyway constitutionally prohibited. They could always say "if Congress wanted to expressly exclude Corporations from this participation they would have said so"-- and old standby rationale. Again I know nothing intrinsically about the case itself, but wanted to give you a view of the complexity of the process. Its not just smoke and mirrors--that anyone can do.