Share
Explore BrainMass

Corporations Running for Office

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.

Solution Preview

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 ...

Solution Summary

The answer to this problem explains the constitutionality of allowing corporations to run for office. The references related to the answer are also included.

$2.19