Rhode Island House Bill H7768

Rhode Island 2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/28/24
• Refer: 2/28/24

Caption

HOUSE RESOLUTION RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING THE RHODE ISLAND CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION TO SUPPORT HOUSE RESOLUTION 54 OF THE 2023-2024 CONGRESS TO AMEND THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION TO PROVE THAT THE RIGHTS PROTECTED AND EXTENDED BY THE CONSTITUTION ARE THE RIGHTS OF NATURAL PERSONS ONLY

Impact

If supported and passed, this bill could lead to significant changes in how rights are attributed in the constitutional framework, especially concerning the balance between corporate interests and individual rights. The bill aims to shift the narrative surrounding corporate personhood, an issue that has been contentious in various legislative and public discussions. Additionally, by supporting an amendment to the Constitution, the bill seeks to reestablish the primacy of individual rights over those extended to corporate entities, potentially reshaping the legal landscape concerning numerous existing laws and regulations that currently favor corporations.

Summary

House Bill 7768 is a resolution put forth by the Rhode Island House of Representatives that calls for support from the state's congressional delegation for House Resolution 54, which seeks to amend the United States Constitution regarding the rights of natural persons and corporations. This resolution stems from concerns about the extent of corporate rights, as highlighted by the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, which granted corporations personhood status allowing them to influence elections through unlimited spending. The bill underscores the importance of ensuring that rights expressed in the Constitution are reserved for natural persons only, thereby aiming to enhance democratic principles and reduce the undue influence of wealth in politics.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding HB 7768 include debates over the implications of limiting corporate rights, especially in areas of campaign financing and electoral integrity. Proponents argue that a constitutional amendment is necessary to protect democracy and prevent the overshadowing of individual rights by corporate power. Conversely, opponents may argue that restricting corporate rights could hinder free speech and economic activities, given that corporations play a substantial role in the economy. Discussions will likely revolve around finding a balance between fostering a fair electoral process and maintaining the operational capabilities of businesses.