Serious question - when the Supremes declared that

[malaise]

corporations were persons, wasn't that the behavior of activist judges?

Didn't that activist decision create the essential problems average citizens have faced for the past 30 years (and more)? Politicians are owned by corporations, media is owned by corporations and corporations running roughshod over citizens. The will of the people does not count.

[safeinOhio]

1. Supremes didn't

It was put in by a law clerk for the court.

[malaise]

2. Please explain n/t

[tsuki]

4. 1886 Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad

Thom Hartman has spoken about this several times.

[Warpy]

3. A clerk declared that, it wasn't a ruling but was only

an illumination of a ruling that had already been made by the Court--and a gross misinterpretation thereof.

Wiki has a great article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood_debate

The doctrine of corporate personhood is the flimsiest one out there and will be extremely easy to abandon once enough will is amassed.

[malaise]

8. Thanks for the link Warpy

:hi:

[undeterred]

5. In 1966 the Supremes declared that

"You can't hurry love..."

[robcon]

6. One of the smartest decisions ever.

A lot of the prosperity of the U.S. comes from the personhood (in law) of corporations.

[RoccoR5955]

7. What a load of carp!

Corporate personhood may have led to prosperity, but mostly for the ultra rich, not much for regular folks.
I say we repeal it, and reinstate tariffs.