Someone playing around with the 14th Amendment!

Story here Unequal Protection, Part I: Corporations

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMQzim2UI9M

Was the judge wrong, or the lawyers?

Since the 19th century, legal personhood has been further construed to make it a citizen, resident, or domiciliary of a state (usually for purposes of personal jurisdiction). In Louisville, C. & C.R. Co. v. Letson, 2 How. 497, 558, 11 L.Ed. 353 (1844), the United States Supreme Court held that for the purposes of the case at hand, a corporation is "capable of being treated as a citizen of [the State which created it], as much as a natural person." Ten years later, they reaffirmed the result of Letson, though on the somewhat different theory that "those who use the corporate name, and exercise the faculties conferred by it," should be presumed conclusively to be citizens of the corporation's State of incorporation. Marshall v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 16 How. 314, 329, 14 L.Ed. 953 (1854). These concepts have been codified by statute, as United States jurisdictional statutes specifically address the domicile of corporations.

Person defined Bouvier's Law Dictionary
1856 Edition

PERSON. This word is applied to men, women and children, who are called natural persons. In law, man and person are not exactly-synonymous terms. Any human being is a man, whether he be a member of society or not, whatever may be the rank he holds, or whatever may be his age, sex, &c. A person is a man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the rights to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 137.

2. It is also used to denote a corporation which is an artificial person. 1 Bl. Com. 123; 4 Bing. 669;
C. 33 Eng. C. L R. 488; Wooddes. Lect. 116; Bac. Us. 57; 1 Mod. 164.

3. But when the word "Persons" is spoken of in legislative acts, natural persons will be intended, unless something appear in the context to show that it applies to artificial persons. 1 Scam. R. 178.

Update coming...

Nice work, Jerry!

I knew about Thom Hartman's book long ago. Still valid information, but hardly the whole story.

It smells like more sidestepping of what the 14th Amendment is about.

The thing is, the United States (the states) has always been smoking crack in regard to the Law of Persons (see my end notes and the case law you noted). The 14th Amendment just extended more power to the United States to create these hideous Frankenstein monsters (i.e., dead things made of many men), as did the states.

Like you appear to reference, Jerry...

Thom appears to not get it. I mean, the "framers" intent? It appears that the framer's intent was always the Frankenstein monsters, i.e. socialism, corporate and otherwise. That case was what the 14th Amendment WAS all about! Empowering corporations in the international sense! The 14th is the right tool to get the job done.

Karl Marx said that Socialism leads to Communism. But he forgot to say that the Communist Manifesto was the blueprint for (corporate) fascism. So, the Fourteenth Amendment did EXACTLY what it was suppose to do.* Now that the doctrines used for Marxism, one being unions (to destroy the little business man), has done its job... There is no longer any use for them. Now all we have left is large corporations that will be very hard to destroy.

Like I say, people LOVE their diapers changed by the government (socialism). But now that endgame is here

The truth is really not the court case in mention, BUT a case of...



This is just another case of someone who blathers about history and reads too much case law.
The knowledge of law is the way to find out what is really going on.

Perhaps Thom Hartman is after more book sales

Have to say, The Red Amendment is MUCH closer to the truth.

So, got gods, or God?

---

* NOTES: Corporations (public) have always been part of the Law of Persons.... Which is NOT natural law.
   The issue is that PRIVATE corporations had been given the personhood as controled by the EMPIRE:

   Excerpts from The Institutes of Roman Law, by Rudolph Sohm (1892), the Law of Persons:

• The jus privatum was throughout a law for the individual only, and hence—as far as the old private law of Rome was concerned—there could be no subject of rights and duties other than a natural person, i.e. an individual. Roman private law had originally no room for gigantic corporate personalities so vastly exceeding the dimensions of the individual personality. Originally, it was neither capable not desirous of supplying the law for any other proprietary relations but those of private persons in the strictest sense of the term, i.e. individual persons. Nevertheless the Roman lawyers succeeded, as we have seen, in securing the recognition of corporations within the domain of private law.

So you see, lawyers of America had done the same thing to the peoples of the republics of the Union that lawyers did to the people of Rome. The 14th Amendment empowers corporations with property rights and protections just as if they were people. This was the true purpose of the Civil War. More Here...

Quote:

That has been stuck in the back of my head forever!
But as I learn more and more the light keeps shining in that direction. 

From the beginning the countries of America have been played like a fiddle.

Another guy who don't get it... Hammerstone.  Hey, the US has always been a commercial plantation.

• http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/fourteenth_amendment_hammerstrom.pdf

And, Reclaim Democracy? Right 

Reclaim Democracy/recycle!!

The "framers" were all Mason's "under the crown." "They" instituted a "republican form" of "government", NOT "a republic if you can keep it" ..as the supposed quote by BJ Franklin has been "patriotarded" throughout the "patriotard" communisit-tunity..

The enslavement began with those Mason's/The Crown's/Vatican's bitch's, ensnaring the commoners into "accepting/believing" that there was/is some "new found freedom", when in fact, it's all been a ploy
from the beginning.

The wunderfool Abe "The Ax-Man/Can't tell a Lie" Lincon (but like all politicianunists), certainly "freed" (opened the door) for further corporate enslavement of then, and future (now).."Citizens/Voters" to perpetuate the Mason's/Crown's/Vatican's enslavement principals.

Too bad Booth didn't get to him sooner..................

P.S. Fireworks are cool and all...yet ..not made in the USSA??..Any WHITE blooded "American" should ask the ?? Why are they made in"RED" China  ????????????????????????????????

Yippie...can't wait for the 4th..gonna wave the "flag"..and jump up and down for "freedom"...