Zincwarrior
Platinum Member
- Nov 18, 2021
- 19,335
- 11,662
- 1,138
Fax machines have no legal rights found by SCOTUS.Same as for phones, fax machines, automobiles, trade unions, and political parties, and yet here they are.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Fax machines have no legal rights found by SCOTUS.Same as for phones, fax machines, automobiles, trade unions, and political parties, and yet here they are.
Fax machines have no legal rights found by SCOTUS.
That doesn't give them special rights. Only companies were given that, mysteriously by the people taking trips paid by people with companies. Its sheer coincidence, I am sure, right Thomas?And yet they exist, and restrictions on faxes couldn't be about content, due to the 1st amendment.
What was restricted was unsolicited faxes in general, thus content neutral to fit in with the 1st.
That doesn't give them special rights. Only companies were given that, mysteriously by the people taking trips paid by people with companies. Its sheer coincidence, I am sure, right Thomas?
That is a legal fiction for purposes of liability exposure. It has no special rights under the Bill of Rights.What "special rights"?
Limited personhood for corporations is solely to be able to tax, regulate, sue and hold accountable the corporation as an entity. When they earn something, or do something, or fuck up something you don't have to go after the pieces or the parts, you go after the whole thing. Taxes, laws, regulations, consequences ALSO apply to them as well as certain limited rights in return.
That is a legal fiction for purposes of liability exposure. It has no special rights under the Bill of Rights.
Hey, we all took a vote. You have to give us all your money. The final tally was all of us For, and just you Against.Move to Amend: End Corporate Rule. Legalize Democracy.
On January 21, 2010, with its ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are persons, entitled by the U.S. Constitution to buy elections and run our government. Human beings are people; corporations are legal fictions.
We, the People of the United States of America, reject the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United and other related cases, and move to amend our Constitution to firmly establish that money is not speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights.
The Supreme Court is misguided in principle, and wrong on the law. In a democracy, the people rule.
We Move to Amend.
". . . corporations have no consciences, no beliefs, no feelings, no thoughts, no desires. Corporations help structure and facilitate the activities of human beings, to be sure, and their 'personhood' often serves as a useful legal fiction. But they are not themselves members of “We the People” by whom and for whom our Constitution was established."
~Supreme Court Justice Stevens, January 2010
- UPCOMING EVENTS
Tuesday, August 27, 2024 at 07:00 PM · 1 rsvp
Dayton Metro Library, Southeast Branch in Dayton, OH
How We Get BIG Money Out of Politics, and More...
- The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission . . .
- opened the floodgates of big money into politics and
- led to the creation of Super PACs that a (show all)
We ought to make sure only citizens are counted for representation. AMERICAN citizens. I thought I should clarify.The US needs to change its political system.
Have Proportional Representation for the House and the Senate. Have the executive taken with bipartisan support and put at least 7 people on it. The Supreme Court should also be chosen with bipartisan support.
Then, maybe the US won't be batshitcrazy