Question

In Dartmouth College v. Woodward, decided Feb. 2, 1819, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the legal personhood of corporations as an essential principle of American law. In a decision by Chief Justice John Marshall, the court found for the school over the state of New Hampshire's takeover. According to Marshall, the court was duty-bound to defend the college's independence because its corporate charter was protected by the Constitution's prohibition on state laws "impairing the obligation of contracts." Dartmouth as an institution - not the teachers, trustees or students, but the corporation itself - had rights the court was obliged to uphold. Although he did not use the exact words, Marshall clearly affirmed the principle that corporations are legal persons. "A corporation," he explained, "is an artificial being" existing "in contemplation of law" and possessing a certain "individuality." Its legal existence necessarily entailed its possession of some rights that are also held by "natural persons," such as a right to hold and transmit property and a right to sue in the courts in defense of its other rights.

Should corporations be considered legal persons? What rights should they have? Not have?

Answer 1

Yes, corporations should be considered as legal persons. The major reasons are:

• They can't hold any bank accounts or any property as such in their name, so operating a business without it next to impossible.
• Again, in legal terms, if corporations are not legal persons, who will we sue in case of crimes or mistakes done by the organization. For example, people claim against Johnson and Johnson, or Ranbaxy or any other company that has been claimed for faulty products and services. In this case, you can not blame a single person but yes can blame the organization.
• In 2010, the Supreme Court gave the right of free speech to the corporation. In 2014, again corporations are granted religious freedom.
• The corporations maintain constitutional rights in free trade agreements.