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

91–100 of 269 posts

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

#91

Post by rayiner »

wat10000 wrote: post #70
tiahura wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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

Exactly! They could do that, so the law shouldn’t treat the two situations differently. You just proved my point, not yours.

> There is some reason they don't do this

I’m sure they have many reasons. But that doesn’t change the fact that the corporation is a proxy for people.

Your real argument seems to be that you think people should have to choose between exercising their rights and having the protections of the corporate form.

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

#92

Post by bwestergard »

ceejayoz wrote: post #86
MattCruikshank wrote: post #83

I was daydreaming about, picture if a corporation buys an entire state. Say, Wyoming or West Virginia. Gemini guesses $180 billion to $250 billion. With that investment, they'd get to control who lives in the state. So, then the corporation gets to control who the Governor is. And the two Senators, and the seat in the Congress. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't a single Senator have just a tremendous amount of pow…

Senators can't veto, and filibusters require 40 other Senators to play ball. The Constitution also overrides any attempt to prevent interstate migration.

"The Constitution also overrides any attempt to prevent interstate migration."

Sure, but if there is no where you can legally stay, because the sole landowner prohibits it, how do you migrate?

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

#93

Post by SoftTalker »

Hugsbox wrote: post #72
SoftTalker wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I own property in a nearby town but it's an investment; I don't live there. I'm unable to vote in their local elections. I have not heard of property ownership being a qualification to vote since the 1800s.

Which makes sense... why should anyone get a say in the local matters of a place they don't even live in?

I own property there, I pay property taxes there (at the highest "non-owner-occupied" rate), in my case I'm actively operating a business not (just) a passive investor. Why should I have zero say in how those taxes are spent, or other local governance? I'm not a disinterested bystander.

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

#94

Post by Avicebron »

Hizonner wrote: post #78
cwmma wrote: post #12

It's specifically about corporations that own property in a specific town voting. So no you can't just spin up a bunch of LLCs to rig an election, this is about the rights of absentee landlords.

How about fuck absentee landlords, especially if they're not actually people?

Seriously, there should be exceptions for the rare case it's an actual person who can't go for an actual reaaon

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

#95

Post by king_geedorah »

NDlurker wrote: post #67
mindslight wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The original complaint cites no minimum land ownership requirement and the judgement does not seem to make specific disagreement with this fact as best I can tell, so that is my understanding as well.

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

#96

Post by rayiner »

Hugsbox wrote: post #72
SoftTalker wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I own property in a nearby town but it's an investment; I don't live there. I'm unable to vote in their local elections. I have not heard of property ownership being a qualification to vote since the 1800s.

Which makes sense... why should anyone get a say in the local matters of a place they don't even live in?

That’s a fair point, but the ACLU didn’t challenge that aspect of the municipal charter.

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

#97

Post by ceejayoz »

bwestergard wrote: post #92
ceejayoz wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Senators can't veto, and filibusters require 40 other Senators to play ball. The Constitution also overrides any attempt to prevent interstate migration.

"The Constitution also overrides any attempt to prevent interstate migration." Sure, but if there is no where you can legally stay, because the sole landowner prohibits it, how do you migrate?

Sure, if we ignore how we get to "the sole landowner" scenario, which is a big hole in the thought experiment.

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

#98

Post by kjkjadksj »

MattCruikshank wrote: post #83

I was daydreaming about, picture if a corporation buys an entire state. Say, Wyoming or West Virginia. Gemini guesses $180 billion to $250 billion. With that investment, they'd get to control who lives in the state. So, then the corporation gets to control who the Governor is. And the two Senators, and the seat in the Congress. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't a single Senator have just a tremendous amount of pow…

Look up Vernon CA history. It is pretty much this where there are a couple city owned residential properties, rest of city is nearly purely industrial, and tenancy of these tightly controlled to shape local election outcomes.

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

#99

Post by rayiner »

esikich wrote: post #59
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…

Does a corporation need healthcare? Can a corporation be jailed? Does a corporation have a finite life in which they can pursue happiness? Does a corporation have offspring it's trying to raise? Does a corporation have hopes and dreams? Does a corporation wish to visit a park or visit with their neighbors? Are you for real?

No, but the people who own and control the corporation all do.

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

#100

Post by kjkjadksj »

nh23423fefe wrote: post #90
josefritzishere wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> a person gets to vote twice. how do they do that?

Whoever dictates the company vote then votes for themselves.
Post reply on HN