Today, in the greatest victory for Free Speech in a century, the Supreme Court ruled that Corporations (for-profit and non-profit, owned by shareholders as well as controlled by union members) are free to exercise political speech
From the Volokh Conspiracy:
This rhetorical tactic is most often used by liberals and leftists to criticize rights advocated by conservatives and libertarians. However, itâ€™s important to understand that the same ploy can easily be turned on rights favored by the political left. Consider, for instance, the right to use contraceptives upheld by the Supreme Court in Griswold v. Connecticut. Contraceptives, after all, have no rights. They are inanimate physical objects, like any other property. Under the Connecticut law banning their use, women were still free to avoid pregnancy (e.g. â€” by abstaining from sex, or by using the rhythm method). They just couldnâ€™t use this particular type of property to do it. Itâ€™s easy to see that any such critique of Griswold would be specious. After all, contraceptives are just a means that women use to exercise their rights to reproductive choice, albeit a particularly effective one.
The same point applies to corporate speech and property rights. When corporations â€œspeak,â€ they are just a means that individuals use to exercise their rights of free speech â€” often a more effective means than the available alternatives. And just as the right protected in Griswold actually was a human right rather than a right belonging to the contraceptives, property rights are rights of human owners, not rights belonging to tracts of land or objects.
And in a wonderful coda, the outrageous persecution of pro-family activists in California was cited as a great example why free speech must be protected. Wonderful!