• Syrc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    As someone who doesn’t speak legalese, are the changes significative? Does everything written in the article still apply?

    • Aatube@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think so. There’s just one significant change that I don’t think affects the main goal.

      The law said that corporations had artificial-person rights, “the same powers as an individual to do all things necessary or convenient to carry out its business and affairs”, including (but not limited to) those in a list. _Citizens United _ basically tacked electoral spending onto that list. The original bill would make the law say “[corporations will only have these rights that we say and nothing else]” followed by the original list. The version that was signed is much more like the original law; it said corporations had artificial-person rights other than electoral spending including (but not limited to) those in the original list.

      There was also a later amendment that changed the effective date from 1 January to 1 July.

      • Syrc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        …being honest I didn’t really understand what the change entails but thanks anyway, I’m sure someone else with more knowledge in US law will find the answer useful!