I think the SCOTUS decisions on Hobby Lobby and Citizens United cases are very bad precedent. This article in the Guardian makes a good argument against it.
Corporations, 'artificial people' and the unintended risks of Hobby Lobby | Money | theguardian.com:
I'm afraid that this new "loophole" that the court has opened will become a larger "tear" in the fabric of our legal framework. We might have had a different result from the Supreme Court if the so-called religious 'freedom" they were protecting was a Muslim freedom rather than a supposed Christian principle. For example, will this decision now allow a corporation to require their employees to follow Sharia law?
Throughout history every time religion and politics get mixed together there have been problems such as Genocide, torture,or massive ignorance (Middle ages).The founders of the United States understood that, and tried very hard to keep religion separate from government.
Al Lewis (Al's Emporium Column) wrote an editorial for the Wall Street Journal that was also published in the San Diego Union Tribune.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/al-lewis-questions-the-hobby-lobby-ruling-1404606315
Al also believes that this latest ruling is a "slippery slope" and that corporations provide a shield behind which bad businessmen can hide. Yes corporations can be fined, but, as he says, it is pretty hard to execute a corporation, or put one in jail.
It is also not clear to me how either the Hobby Lobby or Citizen's United rulings affect international corporations or foreign corporations. Can a foreign "closely held" corporation opt out of certain medical provisions? Can an international corporation contribute funds to political campaigns?
Corporations, 'artificial people' and the unintended risks of Hobby Lobby | Money | theguardian.com:
I'm afraid that this new "loophole" that the court has opened will become a larger "tear" in the fabric of our legal framework. We might have had a different result from the Supreme Court if the so-called religious 'freedom" they were protecting was a Muslim freedom rather than a supposed Christian principle. For example, will this decision now allow a corporation to require their employees to follow Sharia law?
Throughout history every time religion and politics get mixed together there have been problems such as Genocide, torture,or massive ignorance (Middle ages).The founders of the United States understood that, and tried very hard to keep religion separate from government.
Al Lewis (Al's Emporium Column) wrote an editorial for the Wall Street Journal that was also published in the San Diego Union Tribune.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/al-lewis-questions-the-hobby-lobby-ruling-1404606315
Al also believes that this latest ruling is a "slippery slope" and that corporations provide a shield behind which bad businessmen can hide. Yes corporations can be fined, but, as he says, it is pretty hard to execute a corporation, or put one in jail.
It is also not clear to me how either the Hobby Lobby or Citizen's United rulings affect international corporations or foreign corporations. Can a foreign "closely held" corporation opt out of certain medical provisions? Can an international corporation contribute funds to political campaigns?
No comments:
Post a Comment