Does the Right to Free Speech Extend to Corporations?
Under the Supreme Court ruling of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, corporations are afforded free speech. Make a case for or against the constitutionality of not allowing a corporation running for office. Use your position on constitutional interpretation and show how that school of thought informs your position.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com July 21, 2018, 11:27 pm ad1c9bdddf
In compliance with BrainMass rules, this is not a hand in ready paper but only guidance.
In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, corporations are allowed free speech. However, there is a strong case in favor of the constitutionality of not allowing a corporation running for office. The case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission simply allows a corporation to run a campaign for or against a political candidate and not become a candidate (3). A corporation running for office is not a person but represents individuals who in their personal capacity can run for office. Allowing a corporation to run for office means allowing a collection of persons to run for office, which is not what, is written in the constitution. The meaning of a person in a constitution is a human being. A person, who is breathing, living, can think, has feelings, and upholds values. In contrast, a ...
The answer to this problem explains the constitutionality of allowing corporations to run for office. The references related to the answer are also included.