Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Of Corporations, Courts, Personhood, and Morality

  • Margaret M. Blair (a1)

Abstract:

Since the dawn of capitalism, corporations have been regarded by the law as separate legal “persons.” Corporate “personhood” has nonetheless remained controversial, and our understanding of corporate personhood often influences our thinking about the social responsibilities of corporations. This essay, written in honor of Prof. Thomas Donaldson, explores the tension in recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Delaware Chancery Court about what corporations are, whose interests they serve, and who gets to make decisions about what they do. These decisions suggest that the law does not unequivocally support Donaldson’s vision of corporations as “moral” persons.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Allen, William T. 1992. “Our Schizophrenic Conception of the Business Corporation.” Cardozo Law Review 14.
Bebchuk, Lucian A., and Jackson, Robert J. 2010. “Corporate Political Speech: Who Decides?” Harvard Law Review 124: 83.
Berle, Adolf A. 1931. “Corporate Powers as Powers in Trust.” Harvard Law Review 44: 1049–74.
Berle, Adolf A. 1954. The 20th Century Capitalist Revolution (Harcourt Brace).
Berle, Adolf A., and Means, Gardiner C. 1932. The Modern Corporation and Private Property. New York: Macmillan Co.
Blair, Margaret M. 2013. “The Four Functions of Corporate Personhood.” In Handbook of Economic Organization: Integrating Economic and Organization Theory, edited by Grandori, Anna, 440461. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
Blair, Margaret, and Pollman, Elizabeth. 2015. “The Derivative Nature of Corporate Constitutional Rights.” William & Mary Law Review 56: 16731734.
Business Roundtable. 1981. Statement on Corporate Responsibility.
Dodd, E. Merrick Jr. 1932. “For Whom are Corporate Managers Trustees?” Harvard Law Review 45: 1145–63.
Donaldson, Thomas. 1982. Corporations and Morality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Donaldson, Thomas, and Dunfee, Thomas W. 1994. “Toward a Unified Conception of Business Ethics: Integrative Social Contracts Theory.” Academy of Management Review 19(2): 252–84.
Drucker, Peter. 1946. The Concept of the Corporation. New York: John Day Company.
Drucker, Peter. 1975. Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices. New York: Harper Collins.
Friedman, Milton. 1970. “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits.” New York Times Magazine (Sept. 13) available at http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedman-soc-resp-business.html.
Galambos, Louis, and Pratt, Joseph. 1988. The Rise of the Corporate Commonwealth: U.S. Business and Public Policy in the Twentieth Century. New York: Perseus Books Group.
Hobbes, Thomas. (1651) 2010. Leviathan. Edited by Shapiro, Ian. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Kaysen, Carl. 1957. “The Social Significance of the Modern Corporation.” American Economic Review 47: 311–19.
Locke, John. 1689. The Second Treatise of Civil Government (Google eBook, Aug. 28, 2014).
Maier, Charles S. 1988. “Society as Factory” In In Search of Stability: Explorations in Historical Political Economy by Maier, Charles S., 1969. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mason, Edward S., ed. 1959. The Corporation in Modern Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
O’Kelley, Charles R.T., and Thompson, Robert B. 2010. Corporations and Other Business Associations: Cases and Materials, 6th ed. New York: Wolters Kluwer.
Orts, Eric W. 1992. “Beyond Shareholders: Interpreting Corporate Constituency Statutes.” George Washington Law Review 61: 14.
Pells, Richard H. 1989. The Liberal Mind in a Conservative Age: American Intellectuals in the 1940s and 1950s. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University.
Porter, Michael, and Kramer, Mark. 2006. “The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility.” Harvard Business Review, December.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. (1762) 2008. The Social Contract. Edited by Cole, G. D. H.. New York: Cosimo Classics.
Smith, Gordon. 1998. “The Shareholder Primacy Norm.” Journal of Corporation Law 23: 277324.
Somer, A. A. 1991. “Whom Should the Corporation Serve? The Berle-Dodd Debate Revisited Sixty Years Later.” Delaware Journal of Corporate Law 16: 3356.
Strine, Leo E. Jr. 2012. “Our Continuing Struggle With the Idea That For-Profit Corporations Seek Profit.” Wake Forest Law Review 47: 135–72.
Strine, Leo E. Jr. 2015. “A Job is Not a Hobby: Hobby Lobby and the Judicial Revival of Corporate Paternalism.” Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?absract_id=2555816.
Totenberg, Nina. 2014. “When Did Companies Become People? Excavating the Legal Evolution,” NPR, July 28, 2014, available at http://www.npr.org/2014/07/28/335288388/when-did-companies-become-people-excavating-the-legal-evolution.
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1980. Business and Society: Strategies for the 19980s.
Wells, Harwell. 2002. “The Cycles of Corporate Social Responsibility: An Historical Retrospective for the Twenty-first Century.” University of Kansas Law Review 51: 77140.
Wells, Harwell. 2013. “‘Corporation Law is Dead’: Heroic Managerialism, Legal Change, and the Puzzle of Corporation Law at the Height of the American Century.” University of Pennsylvania Journal of Business Law 15(2) : 305–56.
Wishnick, David A. 2012. “Corporate Purposes in a Free Enterprise System: A Comment on eBay v Newmark.” Yale Law Journal 121: 2405–19.

Keywords

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Of Corporations, Courts, Personhood, and Morality

  • Margaret M. Blair (a1)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.