J.A. Terranson <[email protected]>
Assuming all of your arguments to be correct (which I don't), I would want to remove "freedom of speech" for corporations because it artificially amplifies the voice of the corporate entity: the individuals who own the issued shares of the corporation already have these freedoms
They ought to have these freedom, but in practice they don't. Hillary Clinton does not have to obey the campaign finance laws, leftists do not have to obey the campaign finance laws, but Kirk Shelmerdine does have to obey the campaign finance laws.
And because corporations do not, in practice, have these freedoms, their employees and shareholders are denied these freedoms.
