Corporate personhood is the legal notion that a corporation, separately from its associated human beings (like owners, managers, or employees), has at least some of the legal rights and responsibilities enjoyed by natural persons (physical humans).[1] In the United States and most countries, corporations have a right to enter into contracts with other parties and to sue or be sued in court in the same way as natural persons or unincorporated associations of persons. In a U.S. historical context, the phrase 'Corporate Personhood' refers to the ongoing legal debate over the extent to which rights traditionally associated with natural persons should also be afforded to corporations. A headnote issued by the Court Reporter in the 1886 Supreme Court case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. claimed to state the sense of the Court regarding the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as it applies to corporations, without the Court having actually made a decision or issued a written opinion on that point. This was the first time that the Supreme Court was reported to hold that the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause granted constitutional protections to corporations as well as to natural persons, although numerous other cases, since Dartmouth College v. Woodward in 1819, had recognized that corporations were entitled to some of the protections of the Constitution. In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014), the Court found that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 exempted Hobby Lobby from aspects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act because those aspects placed a substantial burden on the closely held company's owners' exercise of free religion.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
Explanation:
It was first used in 1910 which makes it over 100 years ago
The ground-breaking U.S. Supreme Court case "Brown v. Board of Education" concerned B. racial segregation in American schools. It was one of the most important decisions in American history.
<span>The Church music of the Renaissance was attacked by the
Council of Trent because of their use of secular music. Secular vocal music
contains a lot of quick changes in mood than what they consider as holy music.
The council also considered this type of music as an impurity to the Catholic
Church, and so purification of the Church was the justification for those
actions.</span>
it made him more determined because now he knows that knowledge is to be free
