245
‘Logical conclusion’ of Citizens United as Delaware judge lets corporations vote in local elections
(www.commondreams.org)
this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2026
245 points (99.2% liked)
politics
29931 readers
1849 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is insane:
This is turning things totally on it's head. Companies are defined as legal persons exactly so they can be sued, and are responsible to the law. Not the other way around.
By this standard a company that doesn't make money should also have the right to social welfare, and when it gets old to receive a pension.
This is absolute madness, and in no way within what it means to be a legal person in any civilized country.
A legal person does not have for instance citizenship, a legal person does not have human rights, and maybe most importantly a legal person cannot go to jail. Only REAL people can do those things.
The reason it's called a "legal" person is exactly because it is not a REAL person, and for instance doesn't have a right to vote, because a legal person is not a citizen.
USA is such a shitty and insane country it's impossible to put into a few words exactly how bad it is.
Yeah, it's definitely putting the cart before the horse.
The law defines who can initiate and be subject to legal proceedings, and somewhere in there there's gotta be the assumption that you must be a person to do so.
So now they're saying that anyone who can do those things must be a person. It's circular reasoning.
If we make a law that says cats can now be subject to or initiate legal proceedings, does that make them a person? Or do we need a law that grants them personhood status in order to be subject to or initiate legal proceedings?
Also, this is kind of silly: "a person is anyone or anything that..." (emphasis added).
They're literally saying right there that a THING can be a person...
If my computer can initiate legal proceedings, does that make it a person?
How can you bar AI agents from initiating legal proceedings on the grounds that it's not a person, if the deciding factor that determines whether it's a person is whether it's capable of initiating legal proceedings?
This is going to open up so many cans of worms...
Good point. Also an interesting example with the AI.
I wouldn't be surprised if AI will son be used to initiate legal proceedings, or directly start lawsuits, maybe even see them through.
By that logic an AI should also be able to vote, and so would any computer that can run an AI.
So many cans of worms.
They should've regulated it in 2021 but nooo "it'll hamper innovation" they said...
The only thing I appreciated in the article was that the judge said that a fetus wasn't a person.
Yes, until the next case where it is. 🤡
Clearly the fetus should incorporate