Get the Chitiz mug.Bullshit name of an election campaign committee that convinced the Supreme Court to allow corporations decide who wins and who loses federal elections.
Obama State of Union Address mentioned Citizens United with an "in your face" to the Supreme Court. Justice Alito visibly disagreed.
Obama State of Union Address mentioned Citizens United with an "in your face" to the Supreme Court. Justice Alito visibly disagreed.
Citizens United is for good for citizens the same way rat poison is good for rats.
Citizens United sucks. I wanted Joe Shmoe, who seems kind of honest, to win the Senate seat and go to Congress. But the fucking Supreme Court let XYZ corporation provide a billion dollars in advertising for a crook named Bernie Madoff running against him, and it totally sunk Joe's campaign. Now Madoff will haul in millions of dollars in bribes from XYZ and a bunch of their crony companies. America the Beautiful!
Citizens United sucks. I wanted Joe Shmoe, who seems kind of honest, to win the Senate seat and go to Congress. But the fucking Supreme Court let XYZ corporation provide a billion dollars in advertising for a crook named Bernie Madoff running against him, and it totally sunk Joe's campaign. Now Madoff will haul in millions of dollars in bribes from XYZ and a bunch of their crony companies. America the Beautiful!
by euphemismo March 21, 2010
Get the Citizens United mug.Related Words
Chitiz
• chitizen
• citizen
• citizen country
• Citizen Kane
• Chilizmelio
• chhitiz
• chinizzle
• chitit
• Citizen Bane
A freaking talented all female a capella group, putted together by people like Scott Hoying. The members are Cora Isabel, Nina Nelson, Kaylah Sharve', Hannah Mrozak and Kaedi Dalley.
So what you're waiting for? Check them out!
So what you're waiting for? Check them out!
by Lost musical soul January 3, 2019
Get the Citizen Queen mug.Bernard: Without a serial number you are the enemy of every state on the Governed Planet
Joe: I disagree, I was taught that Citizen is a good thing
Bernard: Yes its good, citizenship is the fundamental fulcrum of governing humans
Joe: GOD is my savior
Joe: I disagree, I was taught that Citizen is a good thing
Bernard: Yes its good, citizenship is the fundamental fulcrum of governing humans
Joe: GOD is my savior
by Felix Jabs Arnold August 1, 2018
Get the Citizen mug.1. One of two citizens under the Constitution of the United States. The other is a citizen of the United States. (Slaughterhouse Cases: 83 U.S. 36, at p. 74 and p. 75 1873)
2. A corporation is not a 'citizen' within Const. U. S. art. 4, §2, providing that the “citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens OF the several states,” nor within the Fourteenth Amendment, §1. providing that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside, and that no state shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”
2a. "Section 1770b has been several times considered by this court, and upheld to the full extent of its terms. It is enacted under the undoubted power of every state to impose conditions in absolute discretion upon granting the privilege of doing business in this state to any foreign corporation. Paul v. Virginia, 8 Wall. (U. S.) 168, 19 L. Ed. 357; Chicago T. & T. Co. v. Bashford, 120 Wis. 281, 97 N. W. 940. That power is not restrained by section 2, art. 4, of the federal Constitution, providing that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens OF the several states, nor by section 1, Amend. 14, to that Constitution, providing that no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, because foreign corporations are not citizens. Paul v. Virginia, supra; Chicago T. & T. Co. v. Bashford, supra." Loverin & Browne Company v. Travis: 115 N.W. 829, 831 (1908)
2b. "It bas been repeatedly held, by the supreme court of the United States, that corporations were not citizens of the several states in such sense as to bring them within the protection of that clause in the constitution of the United States (section 2, article IV), which declares that ‘the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens OF the several states;’ Bank of Augusta v. Earle, 13 Peters, 586; Paul v. Virginia, 8 Wallace, 177.
Are corporations citizens of the United States within the meaning of the constitutional provision now under consideration? It is claimed in argument that, before the adoption of the 14th amendment, to be a citizen of the United States, it was necessary to become a citizen of one of the states, but that since the 14th amendment this is reversed, and that citizenship in a state is the result and consequence of the condition of citizenship of the United States.
Admitting this view to be correct, we do not see its bearing upon the question in issue. Who are citizens of the United States, within the meaning of the 14th amendment, we think is clearly settled by the terms of the amendment itself. ‘All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.’ No words could make it clearer that citizens of the United States, within the meaning of this article, must be natural, and not artificial persons; for a corporation cannot be said to be born, nor can it be naturalized. I am clear, therefore, that a corporate body is not a citizen of the United States as that term is used in the 14th amendment." The Insurance Company v. The City of New Orleans: 1 5th. Jud. Cir. 85, 86 thru 88 (1870).
2c. “But in no case which has come under our observation, either in the State or Federal courts, has a corporation been considered a citizen within the meaning of that provision of the Constitution which declares that the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens OF the several States.” Paul v. State of Virginia: 75 U.S. 168, 178 (1868).
3. Privileges and immunities of a citizen of the several states are provided for in Corfield v. Coryell, decided by Mr. Justice Washington in the Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania in 1823. Hodges v. United States: 203 U.S. 1, at p. 15 (1906).
2. A corporation is not a 'citizen' within Const. U. S. art. 4, §2, providing that the “citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens OF the several states,” nor within the Fourteenth Amendment, §1. providing that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside, and that no state shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”
2a. "Section 1770b has been several times considered by this court, and upheld to the full extent of its terms. It is enacted under the undoubted power of every state to impose conditions in absolute discretion upon granting the privilege of doing business in this state to any foreign corporation. Paul v. Virginia, 8 Wall. (U. S.) 168, 19 L. Ed. 357; Chicago T. & T. Co. v. Bashford, 120 Wis. 281, 97 N. W. 940. That power is not restrained by section 2, art. 4, of the federal Constitution, providing that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens OF the several states, nor by section 1, Amend. 14, to that Constitution, providing that no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, because foreign corporations are not citizens. Paul v. Virginia, supra; Chicago T. & T. Co. v. Bashford, supra." Loverin & Browne Company v. Travis: 115 N.W. 829, 831 (1908)
2b. "It bas been repeatedly held, by the supreme court of the United States, that corporations were not citizens of the several states in such sense as to bring them within the protection of that clause in the constitution of the United States (section 2, article IV), which declares that ‘the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens OF the several states;’ Bank of Augusta v. Earle, 13 Peters, 586; Paul v. Virginia, 8 Wallace, 177.
Are corporations citizens of the United States within the meaning of the constitutional provision now under consideration? It is claimed in argument that, before the adoption of the 14th amendment, to be a citizen of the United States, it was necessary to become a citizen of one of the states, but that since the 14th amendment this is reversed, and that citizenship in a state is the result and consequence of the condition of citizenship of the United States.
Admitting this view to be correct, we do not see its bearing upon the question in issue. Who are citizens of the United States, within the meaning of the 14th amendment, we think is clearly settled by the terms of the amendment itself. ‘All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.’ No words could make it clearer that citizens of the United States, within the meaning of this article, must be natural, and not artificial persons; for a corporation cannot be said to be born, nor can it be naturalized. I am clear, therefore, that a corporate body is not a citizen of the United States as that term is used in the 14th amendment." The Insurance Company v. The City of New Orleans: 1 5th. Jud. Cir. 85, 86 thru 88 (1870).
2c. “But in no case which has come under our observation, either in the State or Federal courts, has a corporation been considered a citizen within the meaning of that provision of the Constitution which declares that the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens OF the several States.” Paul v. State of Virginia: 75 U.S. 168, 178 (1868).
3. Privileges and immunities of a citizen of the several states are provided for in Corfield v. Coryell, decided by Mr. Justice Washington in the Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania in 1823. Hodges v. United States: 203 U.S. 1, at p. 15 (1906).
by Big Generator September 19, 2009
Get the citizen of the several states mug.Person 1: Do I look fat in these pants?
Person 2: You would if you could fit in them.
Person 3: Critizing!
Person 2: You would if you could fit in them.
Person 3: Critizing!
by Justopheran October 16, 2011
Get the Critizing mug.by A person who tried. November 24, 2015
Get the citizens arrest mug.