IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/huj/dispap/dp698.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Corporate Bill of Rights

Author

Listed:
  • Uriel Procaccia
  • Eyal Winter

Abstract

Corporate entities enjoy legal subjectivity in a variety of forms, but they are not human beings. This paper explores, from a normative point of view, one of the limits that ought to be imposed on the capacity of corporations to be treated "as if" they had a human nature, their recognition as legitimate bearers of basic human rights. The assertion that corporations, like living persons, are entitled to constitutional protection was famously brought to the fore by a number of recent Supreme Court cases, most notably the Citizens United and the Hobby Lobby cases. In the rational choice analysis that follows this paper reveals that the new jurisprudence emanating from Citizens United may be justified in the relatively insignificant cases of small companies with egalitarian distribution of shares, but ought to be rejected in the more meaningful cases of large public corporations with controlling stockholders. The ruling in Hobby Lobby, on the other hand, can be defended regardless of the size of the corporation or the composition of its owners. In both of these cases it is not the rights of the corporate entity which is truly at stake and the final outcome ought to hinge on the constitutional rights of real human beings.

Suggested Citation

  • Uriel Procaccia & Eyal Winter, 2016. "Corporate Bill of Rights," Discussion Paper Series dp698, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
  • Handle: RePEc:huj:dispap:dp698
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ratio.huji.ac.il/sites/default/files/publications/dp698.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maya Bar-Hillel & Cass R. Sunstein, 2019. "Baffling bathrooms: On navigability and choice architecture," Discussion Paper Series dp726, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:huj:dispap:dp698. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael Simkin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crihuil.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.