Under U.S. law, the corporation is a
legal person, whose wealth can constitute political speech
protected by the first Amendment. It is no matter that the corporation is an
artifice constructed by the state for economic purposes: to concentrate wealth in order to produce goods or provide services. That such an entity would lobby
and spend money (or “speak”) for political purposes may from this standpoint seem strange, or out of place. To be sure, political influence can indeed help the bottom economic line, but is a corporation a political actor if the purpose is economic?
The full essay is at "Corporations and Public Debate."
The full essay is at "Corporations and Public Debate."
