Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

news.bloomberglaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 269 posts

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#61

Post by tiahura »

wat10000 wrote: post #50
rayiner wrote: post #25

I don’t understand why people have so much trouble understanding that a “corporation” is just a proxy for the humans that own and control the corporation. In this case, non-residents who own a house on the island can vote according to the charter. The charter just says that this doesn’t change because you move ownership of the house into a legal entity that some human then owns and controls. The actual grievance seem…

If the corporation is just a proxy for the owners then why is this in court? Why aren't the humans just voting directly? It's well established that it's OK for humans to vote.

because the city of Fenwick Island decided it wanted to set things up a different way, the ACLU challenged, and the judge said the city can it up how they want to.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#62

Post by condis »

rayiner wrote: post #25

I don’t understand why people have so much trouble understanding that a “corporation” is just a proxy for the humans that own and control the corporation. In this case, non-residents who own a house on the island can vote according to the charter. The charter just says that this doesn’t change because you move ownership of the house into a legal entity that some human then owns and controls. The actual grievance seem…

[flagged]

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#63

Post by josefritzishere »

nh23423fefe wrote: post #19
John7878781 wrote: post #2

This sounds completely absurd. What's stopping me from starting up a bunch of LLCs or Trusts to rig the vote?

Read the opinion. > I appreciate that Plaintiff may disagree with Delaware’s policy of authorizing certain municipalities to allow voting on behalf of entity property owners. Visions of faceless large corporations or even HAL, 55 controlling a small town are frightening and the stuff of science fiction. However, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that this policy violates the principle of one person/entity/one vote.

It fundamentally violates one person/entity/one vote. Corporations are not sentient. If you let them vote, a person gets to vote twice. There's no way around that conflict. I feel like this has to collapse on appeal or the nation is doomed.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#64

Post by soco »

rayiner wrote: post #30
bluefirebrand wrote: post #21

I hope we can agree that allowing corporations to vote in any kind of political process is taking corporate personhood too far

[flagged]

Then it wouldn't be a big deal to change that charter, right? Right? Right? Of course, if the actual locals are bothered by it - not us on the internet with exactly zero dogs in that fight.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#65

Post by ceejayoz »

tiahura wrote: post #51
rayiner wrote: post #25

I don’t understand why people have so much trouble understanding that a “corporation” is just a proxy for the humans that own and control the corporation. In this case, non-residents who own a house on the island can vote according to the charter. The charter just says that this doesn’t change because you move ownership of the house into a legal entity that some human then owns and controls. The actual grievance seem…

When I hear people grouse about the concept corporate rights, I always ask them why they hate New York Times _Co._ v. Sullivan.

And they scratch your head and say "but... that ruling applies to regular people, like NYT staff and you and me."

It simply sets a high standard for proving defamation claims by public figures.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#66

Post by rayiner »

mindslight wrote: post #36
rayiner wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's a low effort partisan comment, but "Republicans" generally represent the naked corporate agenda (bad cop) while the "Democrats" at least try to hide it and throw the People some concessions (good cop).

Except we’re talking about Delaware, which is totally controlled by Democrats who also cater to corporations.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#67

Post by NDlurker »

mindslight wrote: post #20
jauntywundrkind wrote: post #8

You can register a corporation in Delaware for $109. The Town of Fenwick Island mentioned here has a population of 400. It's high noon for this matter, & about time to start repealing corporate rights. The undoing of this travesty should be a federal project. But hopefully Delaware can course correct themselves, and reverse the mega-threat to humanity they have been unleashing. At least states like Hawaii are heading…

Doing this at scale might be even cheaper than that. A Delaware Series LLC is $300/year, which then lets you make an unlimited number of independent legal entities. You don't even have to file paperwork with the state to create these new entities, just your own internal bookkeeping. Although presumably you'd have to file paperwork to transfer them a tiny sliver of real estate ($$), register to vote (free), and to act…

So I buy one parcel of land and then split off ownership to each of the 400 entities I created? Crazy

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#68

Post by rayiner »

ceejayoz wrote: post #65
tiahura wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I hear people grouse about the concept corporate rights, I always ask them why they hate New York Times _Co._ v. Sullivan.

And they scratch your head and say "but... that ruling applies to regular people, like NYT staff and you and me." It simply sets a high standard for proving defamation claims by public figures.

“NYT” staff don’t publish the paper, the corporation does.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#69

Post by SkyPuncher »

cwmma wrote: post #9
John7878781 wrote: post #2

This sounds completely absurd. What's stopping me from starting up a bunch of LLCs or Trusts to rig the vote?

It sounds like you it's only corporations that own property in the town that get to vote. So that's probably whats preventing you.

Owning property through a corporation is trivial. 3 of my nearby neighbors are owned via an LLC (rentals).

* Start an LLC/C-corp for a trivial amount of money.

* Purchase land, but instead of paying with it via a personal check, you need a touch of foresight so you can "capitalize" the corporation you just started. Write the check from the corporation, instead of your personal checkbook.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#70

Post by wat10000 »

tiahura wrote: post #61
wat10000 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the corporation is just a proxy for the owners then why is this in court? Why aren't the humans just voting directly? It's well established that it's OK for humans to vote.

because the city of Fenwick Island decided it wanted to set things up a different way, the ACLU challenged, and the judge said the city can it up how they want to.

The question is not what the law says (the headline is sufficient to understand that), but why people are doing this at all. If corporations are just proxies for their owners, then owners who want a vote could just own the property in their own name rather than their corporation's and problem solved. There is some reason they don't do this. I want rayiner to spell it out for me, because that "a corporation is just a proxy" line is 100% horseshit.
Post reply on HN