As Senate Majority Leader, I am writing to express my inclination to think that corporate personality must not be “stretched” on the account of previous traditional legal fiction of “corporate traditions.” Certainly, other previously established laws provide corporations personhood that remains in the lines of being rational, on the other hand, the right to vote should not be one of them. In general, corporate personality allows companies to sue and get sued, hold properties, and enter contracts as a regular human being can do in the State of Georgia. In “Reconceiving Corporate Personhood” by Elizabeth Pollman, it says that “For-profit corporations are not formed for achieving self-expression; ‘[s]hareholders in such entities do not share …show more content…
However, the corporation then is considered a “foreign corporation” in the other state(s) it operates. If the citizenship status that is granted to a human in the US is also granted to a corporation, then the “citizen” would have the right to be a citizen in the fifty states of the US, but that is not the case for corporations incorporated in the US. If corporations cannot be considered fully citizens of the US in the fifty states, as the US’s Fourteenth Amendment states it, then personified-corporations cannot vote in a US …show more content…
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., the Green family run a family business around the principles of the Christian faith. Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) a for-profit institution must provide certain types of preventative care, such as FDA-approved contraceptive methods. The only exceptions that existed for those who do not want to cover such costs were for religious employers and for non-profit institutions. The owners of Hobby Lobby were willing to cover birth control, but not emergency contraceptives, such as Plan B, ella or IUDs. The Supreme Court granted for-profit institutions the right to be exempted from a regulation based on the owners’ religious liberties, claiming that individuals do not lose their religious freedom when they open a family business. Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. said in the delivered opinion about the case that “[t]he Court held that Congress intended for the RFRA [Religious Freedom Restoration Act] to be read as applying to corporations since they are composed of individuals who use them to achieve desired ends.” While the Hobby Lobby case granted corporations the Religious Freedom, the decision did not distinguished corporations as “persons,” but rather “composed of individuals who use them to achieve desired ends,” acknowledging that corporations themselves cannot be “persons” simply because they are not humans, and that behind a corporation considered a “person,” there will always be more