powerhog
Stinkin' up the joint
Premium
join:2000-12-14
Owasso, OK | Corps
Are corporations afforded Constitutional rights? |
|
TechieZero
Tools Are Using Me
Premium
join:2002-01-25
Wesley Chapel, FL
|  said by powerhog  :Are corporations afforded Constitutional rights? Same question I was thinking of too. They are made up of people who have rights other, than that I got nutin.
This is going to turn in to a Bush bash fest soon. However the spin given in these articles don't even scratch the surface of this topic. |
|
PhoenixDown
-- Wants FIOS
Premium
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY
clubs:  
| reply to powerhog
quote:
Are corporations afforded Constitutional rights?
Yes, I believe so, as corporations are treated in a legal sense as 'a person'.
--
Mass Transit Sucks! |
|
quatrix
Premium
join:2005-02-11
Davie, FL
| reply to TechieZero
said by TechieZero :They are made up of people who have rights other, than that I got nutin. What? |
|
Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL
| reply to powerhog
On what grounds?
Even if they are to be treated as individuals the constitution states that unless they have probable cause or a warrant they are not authorized to give that data to anyone.
By Verizon participating in giving out data, they by no means should be dismissed from the investigation. |
|
Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL | reply to quatrix
"They are made up of people who have rights other, than that I got nutin."
I think what he was trying to say is:
They are made up of people who have rights, other than that I got nothing. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| reply to powerhog
said by powerhog :Are corporations afforded Constitutional rights? Yes. Under the law they are citizens of the US. That is not usual in other countries where corporations are not considered persons.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
quetwo
That VoIP Guy
Premium
join:2004-09-04
East Lansing, MI | reply to powerhog
Corporations are not afforded Constitutional rights, however, those working for the corporation do. If they are working under the direction of the corporation, they are not covered. |
|
TechieZero
Tools Are Using Me
Premium
join:2002-01-25
Wesley Chapel, FL
| reply to Michieru2
said by Michieru2 :"They are made up of people who have rights other, than that I got nutin." I think what he was trying to say is: They are made up of people who have rights, other than that I got nothing. yup. Sorry for the misplaced comma.  |
|
woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | reply to TechieZero
It should be a "bush" bash who is asking for this? If the Dems pass this it will be a "Dem" bash too.....I could be wrong, but I thought it was against the constitution to pass laws to cover crimes "retroactively"?
--
BlooMe |
|
powerhog
Stinkin' up the joint
Premium
join:2000-12-14
Owasso, OK
·AtlasOK
| reply to TKJunkMail
If true, then I wonder if they've fully considered the implications of their case.
By arguing that "sensitive" customer information is available to be distributed via the First Amendment, then what's to stop one of their employees from giving away corporate "secrets" using the same argument?
The outcome of this should prove interesting. |
|
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
 ·Speakeasy
| reply to woody7
said by woody7 :It should be a "bush" bash who is asking for this? If the Dems pass this it will be a "Dem" bash too.....I could be wrong, but I thought it was against the constitution to pass laws to cover crimes "retroactively"? What gave you the impression that this group of wannabe-fascists cares about some tupid piece of paper?
--
Everyday, thousands of new cars are delivered to their new owners with poorly-selected radio station presets. |
|
justaguy
@lmco.com
| reply to woody7
I believe you are referring to 'ex post facto' laws. Or laws that are made after the fact.
It IS unconstitutional to pass a law to make an action illegal, and then prosecute those who committed the actions while it was legal.
I am almost 100% sure that it is NOT unconstitutional to make something legal, and then effectively offer a pardon for such an action. |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC | That's correct. In this case they aren't making spying on Americans legal, of course if they can pardon corps everytime then it's effectively legal. Be sure to vote out your representative if they let Verizon and ATT get away with it. |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC | reply to powerhog
They can't vote. I believe that Congress can make laws abridging the free speech of corporations. |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to woody7
said by woody7 :If the Dems pass this it will be a "Dem" bash too..... Nah... The Democrat party will never be held liable for this sort of thing. No one ever disses Clinton for signing the DMCA into law or for Carnivore or for the Clipper Chip proposal.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
fprgotpassagain
@rr.com
| reply to Michieru2
what? The law should say nothing preventing them from sharing whatever information they choose to with anyone. Verizon signs no confidentiality agreement with its customers so there is no basis for a civil action even.Any law that prevented them from sharing information WOULD violate the 1st amendment.
said by Michieru2 :On what grounds? Even if they are to be treated as individuals the constitution states that unless they have probable cause or a warrant they are not authorized to give that data to anyone. By Verizon participating in giving out data, they by no means should be dismissed from the investigation. |
|
forgotpassagain
@rr.com
| reply to nixen
You don't even know what a fascist is. How about you learn the definition of a term before you start painting people with it. I don't even care if you are wrong - just know the basic definition of the insult you are using.
said by nixen :said by woody7 :It should be a "bush" bash who is asking for this? If the Dems pass this it will be a "Dem" bash too.....I could be wrong, but I thought it was against the constitution to pass laws to cover crimes "retroactively"? What gave you the impression that this group of wannabe-fascists cares about some tupid piece of paper? |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to Michieru2
said by Michieru2 :Even if they are to be treated as individuals the constitution states that unless they have probable cause or a warrant they are not authorized to give that data to anyone. Except for some laws concerning private information like medical records and VHS/DVD rentals and certain financial records, there is nothing that prevents corporations from giving your info to anyone, including the government.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
Armada1
Heat Miser
join:2001-05-16
Chicago, IL
| reply to powerhog
said by powerhog :Are corporations afforded Constitutional rights? No. People have inherent rights created under natural law and the US Consitution is a document that says the Federal Gov may NOT infringe on these rights. Corporations do not exist under these principles, they exist under US State law and US Commerical Code. Their 'rights' are defined by laws that give them a framework to operate. 100,000+ lawyers argue the details of that everyday.
--
Formerly the Snow Miser... |
|
