abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

Esta página no está disponible en Español y está siendo mostrada en English

Artículo

21 Feb 2003

Autor:
William Baue, SocialFunds.com

Book Review: Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights

In the Kasky v. Nike case...Nike's claim to free speech rights is predicated on an 1886 [U.S.] Supreme Court case that established "corporate personhood" and extended citizens' rights to corporations. However, the [U.S.] Supreme Court justices' 1886 decision did not, in fact, establish corporate personhood, according to author Thom Hartmann.

Línea del tiempo