Evolving corporate regulation

Evolving corporate regulation based on their status as subsidiaries of the state.

While I have long thought that the equation of money with speech is dubious and would argue that the issuer of what I consider a tool has a right to specify how and by whom this tool is used, the notion that artificial bodies (companies and corporations) which are organized with the specific intent of evading personal responsibility should be accorded the rights of natural persons needs to be rejected. That’s two reasons why corporate entities are not entitled to be unaccountable for their communications/speech. That is, no free speech for artificial bodies.

However, the AG of New York is taking a different tack, which I also applaud. And that is that she is taking into account that, as an organization whose existence and operations have been authorized by agents of government, companies and corporations may be called “private,” but are, in fact, subsidiaries of the particular state in which they are chartered and ipso facto subject to supervision and detailed review of operations. In other words, corporations, regardless of whether they seek to accumulate a monetary profit or perform eleemosynary functions, are quasi-governmental entities and subject to following rules and regulations as such. That many organizers of corporate entities are motivated by a desire and expectation not to be regulated or ruled does not affect that, at least potentially, they are.