Corporate Bill of Rights
Uriel Procaccia and
Eyal Winter ()
Discussion Paper Series from The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem
Corporate entities enjoy legal subjectivity in a variety of forms, but they are not human beings. This paper explores, from a normative point of view, one of the limits that ought to be imposed on the capacity of corporations to be treated "as if" they had a human nature, their recognition as legitimate bearers of basic human rights. The assertion that corporations, like living persons, are entitled to constitutional protection was famously brought to the fore by a number of recent Supreme Court cases, most notably the Citizens United and the Hobby Lobby cases. In the rational choice analysis that follows this paper concludes that the new jurisprudence emanating from Citizens United may be justified in the relatively insignificant cases of small companies with egalitarian distribution of shares, but ought to be rejected in the more meaningful cases of large public corporations with controlling stockholders. Hobby Lobby, on the other hand, presents a more nuanced dilemma and has some normative advantages that are not apparent in situations resembling Citizens United.
Pages: 11 pages
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-law and nep-net
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:huj:dispap:dp698
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Discussion Paper Series from The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Michael Simkin ().