-One thing I always wonder about the corporate personhood, is, wouldn't it be -better to expand it in a totally literal-minded way. (I know, you would have -to abolish limited liability - I don't know how to do that, of course.) Say, -if they are going to be considered people and have the rights people have, -they should have the responsibilities people have. Thus, say, OK -corporations are people, so, when they commit crimes, the board, CEO and all -of upper management have to do jail time. They cause someone's death, they -get life sentences. Three strikes in California, we throw away the key. Etc. -You could then criminalize environmental and labor law violations, and all -sorts of other potentially great stuff. I think most people would rather see -corporations gain responsibilities -- and miscreants wear leg irons -- than -lose rights.
Actually, many labor and environmental laws have criminal sanctions built in. They are just rarely invoked. Part of the point of corporate personhood is to divert attention from individual responsibility of managers and shareholders. Only the corporate entity is legally responsible, not the individuals involved.
I've actually been working with a coalition on NYC legislation to hold the shareholders of restaurants in the city individually responsible for minimum wage and other labor violations by barring them from the industry for five years. There would also criminal sanctions if they lie to the city about their track record of labor violations. What's amazing is how freaked out most people are by the idea of really holding corporate owners responsible for the actions of their companies.
Nathan Newman