# Could Montana get the court to reconsider Citizens United? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [June 10, 2012, 8:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699 "2012-06-10T08:43:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 32
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/621 "2012-08-13T16:30:00Z")
> [@gamerunknown](#): > > The 14th amendment was written to emancipate slaves. I think the judicial precedence of applying the rights enshrined in it to corporations has done far more damage to it. No, that was the 13th. The rights of corporations exist independently of the 14th amendment, as they do for any other group of persons in any organizational structure. If groups had no rights, the government could, for instance, confiscate property held jointly, or simply ban groups at will. This has nothing to do with whether they organize as corporations. Do you think corporations, or other groups, should have no rights? If a corporation is sued, does it have the right to an attorney? Does a corporation have no property rights? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/622 "2012-08-13T16:31:37Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Bad logic.🙂 > > Here’s the thing. Let’s say you guys are right and all this money in politics is convincing people to vote in ways they otherwise wouldn’t. They’ve still decided to support these politicians! To the voter, democracy is working just fine! > > Why would voters grab guns and shoot the very people they decided to elect? You are saying “voters” like they are a unanimous mass. They are not. If any sizable portion of the electorate decides that their vote is meaningless, you gonna have a problem on your hands, especially if they find their lives turning to shit because of, you know, the economy being in the crapper for everyone but the rich people who have taken over our democracy. It’s just a matter of time. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/623 "2012-08-13T16:33:28Z")
If “sizeable” means a minority, it will be an ugly, and short, rebellion. if the corporations can control the masses at will, that means there is no hope of ever changing the system. The fact that most people actually do think it can be changed indicates that it’s not really as big a problem as they say it is. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/624 "2012-08-13T16:39:28Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > What I don’t get is why they are even bothering with an amendment. Supposedly elections aren’t fair due to advertising by wealthy interests. How would they expect to get an amendment passed when the wealthy would just spend millions to defeat it? Yes, it reminds me of the situation back in the 90s when term limits were all the rage. In a few places, a majority of voters approved term limit ballot initiatives - and at the same time elected incumbents who had already served more than the number of terms that the term limits applied. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/625 "2012-08-13T16:41:13Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > You are saying “voters” like they are a unanimous mass. They are not. If any sizable portion of the electorate decides that their vote is meaningless, you gonna have a problem on your hands, especially if they find their lives turning to shit because of, you know, the economy being in the crapper for everyone but the rich people who have taken over our democracy. It’s just a matter of time. Yes, ultimately an angry mob will do what it wants. But until that happens, we can still judge whether the mob is right or wrong. When half of Americans don’t even bother to show up to vote, I say they should stop whining about how their vote doesn’t matter. ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/626 "2012-08-14T11:51:35Z")
> [@lance strongarm](#): > > a corporation is sued, does it have the right to an attorney? Does a corporation have no property rights? Property rights do not even derive from the constitution (unless you’re going to argue that they’re part of the tenth amendment rights reserved for people - using the judicial interpretation of a corporation as a person). I don’t believe in limited liability. If a person invested in a business and they profit from its practices, then they are responsible when those practices cause death or injury. Edit: > [@adaher](#): > > Individuals engaging in journalism Since when are advertisements journalism? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/627 "2012-08-14T13:47:01Z")
> [@gamerunknown](#): > > Property rights do not even derive from the constitution (unless you’re going to argue that they’re part of the tenth amendment rights reserved for people - using the judicial interpretation of a corporation as a person). I don’t believe in limited liability. If a person invested in a business and they profit from its practices, then they are responsible when those practices cause death or injury. Property rights are in the Constitution, in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th amendments. > [@](#): > > Since when are advertisements journalism? If we’re limiting campaign regulation to the regulation of campaign ads, then there’s no need for a press exception. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/628 "2012-08-14T17:19:35Z")
> [@gamerunknown](#): > > Property rights do not even derive from the constitution (unless you’re going to argue that they’re part of the tenth amendment rights reserved for people - using the judicial interpretation of a corporation as a person). Whatever. They’re still rights. Should groups not have them? As soon as you own property as a group - a corporation, partnership, heck, even a family - have you no rights? > [@](#): > > I don’t believe in limited liability. If a person invested in a business and they profit from its practices, then they are responsible when those practices cause death or injury. Then you want everyone to become an independent merchant or mom and pop operation. Nobody will invest money or buy stock without limited liability. You don’t understand how the modern world works. > [@](#): > > Edit: > > Since when are advertisements journalism? Since when does it matter? They are both _speech._ ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/629 "2012-08-14T17:31:09Z")
Given that government pension funds invest in corporations, that would mean that the pension fund would be on the hook for more than their investment should a corporation do wrong. ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/630 "2012-08-15T11:46:35Z")
> [@lance strongarm](#): > > As soon as you own property as a group - a corporation, partnership, heck, even a family - have you no rights? One has roughly equivalent rights as with sole ownership. Unless you can point to a specific right which is lost, other than a lack of liability. > [@adaher](#): > > Given that government pension funds invest in corporations, that would mean that the pension fund would be on the hook for more than their investment should a corporation do wrong. Liability should apply for anyone that voluntarily funded an enterprise up to the total amount of profit they derived from the practices of that enterprise. > [@adaher](#): > > Property rights are in the Constitution, in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th amendments. I see. Well, no soldiers will be reappropriating corporations or seizing their property without compensation, as the corporate holdings will be in the hands of people proportionally to the amount of money invested into the corporation. The rights granted by the fifth amendment are personal, after all. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/631 "2012-08-15T13:16:30Z")
> [@gamerunknown](#): > > One has roughly equivalent rights as with sole ownership. Unless you can point to a specific right which is lost, other than a lack of liability. You have a right to your share of a corporation’s property, but does the corporation have the right to its property, or can the government confiscate it without due process, etc.? If so, saying that individuals have property rights when they own part of a corporation is absurd. > [@](#): > > Liability should apply for anyone that voluntarily funded an enterprise up to the total amount of profit they derived from the practices of that enterprise. And that’s pretty much how it works. You buy shares in a company and the company is liable? You may lose the value of the shares. Someone shouldn’t be able to sue you for what a company did. > [@](#): > > I see. Well, no soldiers will be reappropriating corporations or seizing their property without compensation, as the corporate holdings will be in the hands of people proportionally to the amount of money invested into the corporation. The rights granted by the fifth amendment are personal, after all. How is that different from how it works now? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/632 "2012-08-15T13:25:41Z")
> [@gamerunknown](#): > > Liability should apply for anyone that voluntarily funded an enterprise up to the total amount of profit they derived from the practices of that enterprise. Now I’m not an expert on limited liabliity, but from what I understand it means that investors can only lose their investment. You might actually be creating a lower standard of liability there.🙂 ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/633 "2012-08-15T13:54:04Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Now I’m not an expert on limited liabliity, but from what I understand it means that investors can only lose their investment. You might actually be creating a lower standard of liability there.🙂 Oops. Here, gamer: [Limited liability - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_liability) ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/634 "2012-08-15T14:38:04Z")
That’s what it says, doesn’t it? Your potential for loss is limited to what you put into the company. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/635 "2012-08-15T15:30:46Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That’s what it says, doesn’t it? Your potential for loss is limited to what you put into the company. Yep, pretty much. ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 10:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/636 "2012-08-16T10:41:46Z")
> [@lance strongarm](#): > > does the corporation have the right to its property Not separately from the property of the shareholders. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/637 "2012-08-16T13:20:29Z")
> [@gamerunknown](#): > > Not separately from the property of the shareholders. What does that even mean? ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 9:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/638 "2012-08-17T09:16:42Z")
> [@lance strongarm](#): > > What does that even mean? The corporation has no right of property not derived from its shareholders. If the government confiscates some dongle, its not the corporation that’s been wronged, but the shareholders. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 9:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/639 "2012-08-17T09:18:19Z")
Which is why in practice corporations must be treated like persons. Because there is no way to separate the rights of the group from the rights of the individual. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699/640 "2012-08-17T13:32:54Z")
> [@gamerunknown](#): > > The corporation has no right of property not derived from its shareholders. If the government confiscates some dongle, its not the corporation that’s been wronged, but the shareholders. The shareholders should each go hire individual lawyers and fight the government for their $500 worth of stock? What’s the point of a corporation at all if it can’t act as a single unit? What is this obsession you have with not letting groups act as groups? Would you say the same thing about a church? If the government confiscated the property of a church, would you say it’s fine because it has no rights? Or would you say the church members must each hire lawyers? How would you measure what each person’s ownership of the church is valued? Suppose they all settled the lawsuit with the government - do you think nobody suffered a loss from having to let the government destroy their church, since they each got paid $50 or whatever for the effort? Great - now they have no church to worship in. Do you think their religious rights weren’t violated? People form institutions that act as a single unit, and have certain legal rights as an individual unit. Nothing wrong with that. Get over it already. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699.md?page=31) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-montana-get-the-court-to-reconsider-citizens-united/624699.md?page=33)