Fake News for Big Brother

[Tim May]

On Thursday, May 1, 2003, at 02:07  PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:

> On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 09:42:21AM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 11:09:29AM +0200, Thomas Shaddack wrote:
>>> If I speak for myself, the First Amendment applies.
>>>
>>> But should it apply even to corporations? Are such entities 
>>> considered to
>>> be persons? Should they have "rights"?
>>
>> How about Indymedia? How about a student newspaper collective? How
>> about Slashdot and its editors? How about the New York Times' 
>> editorial page?
>>
>
>    That's obviously covered under the 1st's "freedom of the press". 
> What does
> that have to do with non-humans (corporations) having Constitutional 
> rights? The
> arguement always put forth is that corporations have the right to make 
> campaign
> contributions, because that's "freedom of speech". But I guess if 
> those rights
> are going to be extended to non-humans like corporations, then there's 
> no way to
> stop them from being extended to other non-human entities as well, 
> such as
> animals and trees. Or even rocks.

I cited the full text of the First. It doesn't talk about who has 
rights: it says "Congress shall make no law."

Again, the full text. You need to read it, and absorb exactly what it 
says:

"--
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or 
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of 
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to 
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
--
"

So, yes, if Congress tried to pass a law about the speech of trees or 
rocks, it would be unconstitutional under the "shall make no law" 
language. This doesn't mean trees and rocks have "freedom of the press" 
or "free speech rights."

More practically, the First means Congress shall make no law about 
speech, period. Or about the other things covered. Notice the word 
"or." This is important.

The First does not say "Congess shall make no law...abridging the 
freedom of speech of individual persons when engaged in press 
activities or political speech."

It says what it says.

The "rights of corporations," to use your phrasing, thus derive from 
the specific prohibition placed on Congress (and thus on all states, 
through their requirement to support and defend the Constitution as a 
condition of joining the Union...and repeated in the 14 Amendment 
because some states didn't think the words of the Constitution applied 
to their fiefdoms).



"A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that worked ...A complex system designed from scratch 
never  works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to 
start over,  beginning with a working simple system." -- Grady Booch