Alas, the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution means that this gesture has no legal effect. Federal law is supreme over municipal la, and the US Supreme Ct has jheld long ago that corporations are persons for purposes of the 14th Amendment, and thus for purposes of the various rights in the Bill of Rights that have been subsequently incorporated against the states via the 14A, including due process, no takings, and the like. A local govt pronouncement cannot trump an Sct opinion. jks
Michael Hoover <hooverm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"First Local Government in the United States
Refuses to Recognize Corporate Claims to Civil Rights:
Bans Corporate Involvement in Governing!!"
-----
There is now an escalation of events in Pennsylvania regarding corporate
personhood!
The elected officials of Porter Township, Pennsylvania, have passed a
law declaring that corporations operating in that township may not
claim civil and constitutional privileges.
- [PEN-L:33405] Re: The real Mary, (continued)
- [PEN-L:33405] Re: The real Mary, Michael Perelman Wed 25 Dec 2002, 16:24 GMT
- [PEN-L:33400] Frist's Skeletons, Michael Hoover Wed 25 Dec 2002, 11:10 GMT
- [PEN-L:33410] Re: Frist's Skeletons, Michael Perelman Wed 25 Dec 2002, 19:23 GMT
- [PEN-L:33399] Local Government Rejects Corporate Personhood, Michael Hoover Wed 25 Dec 2002, 11:03 GMT
- [PEN-L:33404] Re: Local Government Rejects Corporate Personhood, andie nachgeborenen Wed 25 Dec 2002, 16:14 GMT
- [PEN-L:33406] Re: Re: Local Government Rejects Corporate Personhood, Ian Murray Wed 25 Dec 2002, 16:49 GMT
- [PEN-L:33409] Re: Re: Re: Local Government Rejects Corporate Personhood, andie nachgeborenen Wed 25 Dec 2002, 18:48 GMT
- [PEN-L:33411] Re: Re: Re: Re: Local Government Rejects Corporate Personhood, Ian Murray Wed 25 Dec 2002, 20:30 GMT
- [PEN-L:33412] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Local Government Rejects Corporate Personhood, andie nachgeborenen Wed 25 Dec 2002, 20:49 GMT