Corporate Rights

    

     I don’t think the concept of corporate personhood in the United States’ law system is progressing the country toward anywhere desirable. This unfortunate theme of the judiciary siding with big-businesses rather than individuals has been a trend since the 1800s when corporations were first ruled as legal citizens of the states they resided in. Corporations were granted the freedom of speech in 2010 (Citizens United v. FEC) and now with Burwell v. Hobby Lobby the freedom of religion. But as said in Mirk’s article “it seems like the Supreme Court is happy to protect freedom of religion—as long as it’s the religion of the people at the top of society.” The religious beliefs of corporate CEOs are being unfairly imposed upon every worker of the company and that is not what the freedom of religion allows. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg even noted in her dissent that “the right to exercise your religion is protected in the United States up to the point where it impinges on someone else’s freedom.” It seems to me that denying access to birth control is a blatant infringement upon the freedoms of others. So even if corporations are somehow in fact people, this method of exercising religion should not be considered valid or fair. The alleged rights of Hobby Lobby as a corporate entity should not take precedence over the well-being of the people it employs.

    

     I read another online article that said just one day after the Hobby Lobby ruling, a group of religious leaders sent a letter to Obama requesting they be exempt from an executive order which would “prohibit discrimination in hiring and employment on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity by employers with at least 15 employees” (from the ENDA wiki page). This request for exclusion was made on the basis of religious rights. Given the increasing number of rights allowed to corporations throughout the history of the U.S. government, I wonder if SCOTUS would approve this request.