Comment by johnnyanmac a day ago
This is about as much foreign commerce as it is me buying a Xiaomi phone.
I know there's court precedent, but corporations aren't people. It's yet another Chinese platform that Americans use to communicate with other western companies.
> > corporations aren't people
> Corporate personhood is irrelevant to this case.
Further more, "Corporations are people" implying corporations have rights isn't related to corporate personhood and is based on a (often deliberate by opposing politicians) misinterpretation of the phrase, as spoken by Mitt Romney.
What Romney was saying and what is true when he said "Corporations are people" is confusing because people interpret it as "Corporations are persons" which is not what he, or the case law he was referring to implied. The singular of the phrase is much more clear, a corporation is people.
The whole case was about a group of people pooling their funds to make a movie about Hilary Clinton being bad and the court found that the people still had free speech rights when acting through a corporation to pool their funds and so political donation limits didn't apply as long as no political campaign was involved. Hence, Super PACs having to say that the campaigns their supporting aren't involved with the campaigns.
It's actually an incredibly complicated and nuanced situation and the decision is equally so.
> I was looking forward to the day when I could finally marry Lockheed Martin
You can’t marry a child or your cousin (in most states), that doesn’t mean they aren’t people.
Funnily enough, as per Mitt Romney, the TikTok ban was done because it had too much anti-Israel content
That’s an incredible behind the curtains slip. I wonder if the media will pick this up.
Seeing how it was made May 2024, seems like they didn't want to highlight the connection.
>This is about as much foreign commerce as it is me buying a Xiaomi phone.
Isn't that obviously foreign commerce?
> corporations aren't people
Corporate personhood is irrelevant to this case.