If corporations are legal persons,

[needledriver]

why can't CEO's be prosecuted for murder if their epic fail policies kill a corporation?

[baldguy]

1. If corporations are legal persons

The CEO and any other officer is merely an employee.

If a corporation commits murder, the entire corporation should be put in prison.

Which exposes the absurdity of "legal personhood" for a corporation.

[needledriver]

4. That would be the corporation committing suicide.

I figure that if a corporation is a legal person, then someone must be held responsible if, as a legal person, the corporation dies.

Would the "murderer" be the CEO, or Board of Directors?

Either a corporation is a legal person, whose death should be prosecuted, or a corporation is not a legal person.

[baldguy]

6. If my right hand pulls a tirgger on a gun which kills a person

They don't cut it off & send it to prison by itself. My whole person goes along with it.

[Goldstein1984]

2. If the SCOTUS decides that corporations are "persons"

then as persons they can be "killed."

Maybe a suitable response would be targeted boycotts to "murder" a few.

[FiveGoodMen]

3. "targeted boycotts to murder a few" would be a good idea whether they are persons or not

[Goldstein1984]

5. I've written that myself

and got unrecced up the butt for it.

Activism seems to have become a word not mentioned in polite company.

I still think an economic message is the only kind TPTB will notice. I'm already boycotting myself, but I'm waiting for someone with a national soap box to gather the courage to rally people to join in a decisive action.

Although the alliance would trouble me, the Teabaggers have come to the same conclusion as Progressives regarding the failure of the parties to represent them and the corruption and lack of representation in government in general. It may be necessary to draw on populist outrage on both ends of the political spectrum to hurt corporations.

[Land Shark]

7. If corpse are "persons" then why aren't human beings "persons"? (Rasul v Myers --2009 case)

In Rasul v Meyers (APril 2009) the DC Circuit court of appeals held that a detainee at Gitmo as not a "person" for purposes of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, SPECULATING that Congress must not have meant to use the word "person" in its normal sense.