We the People v. Corporate “ Persons ”

1. www.MoveToAmend.org We the People v. Corporate “Persons” Presented by (Affiliate & presenter’s name here) Contact: (email & phone numbers here) • Our Threatened Democracy • Role of Supreme Court • Regaining Sovereignty

2. www.MoveToAmend.org Has depleted our power to regulate corporations

3. www.MoveToAmend.org Excessive Corporate Influence • Electoral process (unlimited contributions) • Legislation, e.g.: • Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) • Tax loop-hole for fund managers • Cuts to regulatory agencies • Constitutional rights

4. www.MoveToAmend.org Corporate Influence on Elections Green line = 501(c)(4) = Dark Money Source: Center for Responsive Politics www.MoveToAmend.org

5. www.MoveToAmend.org Corporate Influence on Legislation Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/health/ Source: http://www.countysustainability.ca/

6. www.MoveToAmend.org Regulatory Agency Cuts Source: http://www.foreffectivegov.org. 1980 – 2005: Inspections down from 1.77 to 0.668 per 100,000 worker. 1981 – 2011: Workplaces double; inspectors per workplace cut in half.

7. www.MoveToAmend.org Supreme Court: Overview • States must treat corporation as “persons” (14th) • Corporation must maximize shareholder wealth • Protected from search (4th) • Protected from “takings” (5th) • Granted free speech; money = speech (1st)

8. www.MoveToAmend.org 14th Amendment prior to 1886 “The clause which forbids a State to deny to any person the equal protection of the laws was clearly intended to prevent the hostile discrimination against the negro race… a strong case would be necessary for its application to any other.” (Source: The Slaughterhouse Cases (1873). Justice Miller. at: www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/83/36)

9. www.MoveToAmend.org 14th Amendment: 1886 & 1888 Santa Clara Headnote: “The Court does not wish to hear argument on the question of whether the 14th Amendment to the Constitution…applies to corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does.” Pembrina: “Under the designation of person (in the 14th Amendment) there is no doubt that a private corporation is included.” Source: Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad. At: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com Source: Pembrina Consolidated Silver Mining and Milling Company v. Pennsylvania. Justice Field. At: http://grammar.ucsd.edu

10. www.MoveToAmend.org 4th Amendment (Search) 1906 Justice Brown: “…we do not wish to be understood as holding that a corporation is not entitled to immunity, under the 4th Amendment, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” Justice Harlan, dissenting “In my opinion, a corporation - an artificial being -, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of law cannot claim the immunity given by the 4th Amendment; for it is not a part of the 'people,' within the meaning of that Amendment.  Source: Hale v. Henkel. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/

11. www.MoveToAmend.org Dodge v. Ford 1919: The goal of a corporation is shareholder wealth maximization1 Wealth maximization is only one contributor to the General Welfare • Other Contributors: • Health; • Clean air and water; • Ethical behavior; • Recreational opportunities • Welfare of future generations 1Supreme Court Decision 1919, Dodge vs Ford. Source: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2345&context=fss_papers

12. www.MoveToAmend.org 5th Amendment. Takings: 1922 vs. 1991 “Government hardly could go on if to some extent values incident to property could not be diminished without paying for every such change in the general law.” Justice Brandeis, 1922., “ Source: Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon at: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/260/393 “The grand plan was to make government pay compensation as for a taking of property every time its regulations impinged too severely on a property right—If the government labored under so severe an obligation, there would be, to say the least, much less regulation.” Charles Fried, 1991. Source: Order and Law in Echeverria & Hansen-Young, ”The Track Record on Takings Legislation: Lessons from Democracy’s Laboratories. Georgetown Environmental Law and Policy Program.2008.

13. www.MoveToAmend.org 1st Amendment. 2010 “The judgment of the District Court is reversed with respect to the constitutionality of … restrictions on corporate independent expenditures.” Source: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. At: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com

14. www.MoveToAmend.org Regaining Sovereignty: Government Basics We the people are sovereign We delegate our authority to the state & federal governments People State governments create artificial entities: Government Corporations Unions NGOs

15. www.MoveToAmend.org We Can & Must Rein in Corporations We the People are Sovereign

16. www.MoveToAmend.org The Means: Constitutional Amendment • 19th: Women get the right to vote • Overturns Minor v. Happersett • 28th Proposed: Corporations are not people • Overturn corporate Constitutional rights • Two paths: • Congress proposes (2/3 of both houses) • States call Convention (2/3 of legislatures) Either path requires ratification by 3/4 of states

17. www.MoveToAmend.org Corporations are NOT People The General Welfare has precedence over Wealth Accumulation Corporations are abusing our Constitutional Rights – END IT

18. www.MoveToAmend.org THANK YOU! Questions?

19. www.MoveToAmend.org Selected Resources Allison, Jim. The Prosecution of Judge Waite. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ykmVqPoAcs. Starts about 3 minutes into video. Pdf available at: http://www.thealliancefordemocracy.org/pdf/JudgeWaite.pdf. Echeverria, J. and Hansen-Young, T.. The Track Record on Takings Legislation: Lessons from Democracy’s Laboratories. Georgetown Environmental Law & Policy Institute. 2008. Available at: http://www-assets.vermontlaw.edu Grossman, Richard L. and Frank T. Adams. Taking Care of Business Citizenship and the Charter of Incorporation. In Defying Corporations, Defining Democracy. Dean Ritz, ed., Apex Press. New York. 2001. Kendall, Douglas T. and Charles P. Lord. The Takings Project: A critical analysis and assessment of the progress so far. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review. Vol. 25. 1998. Available at: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1280&context=ealr Powell, Lewis F. Confidential Memorandum: Attack on American Free Enterprise System. Available at: http://law2.wlu.edu/deptimages/Powell%20Archives/PowellMemorandumTypescript.pdf