Brief Fact Summary. The Appellant, the First National Bank of Boston (Appellant) brought suit seeking to have a Massachusetts statute declared unconstitutional because it infringed on the First Amendment constitutional rights of banks and corporations who wanted to spend money to publicize their political views.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. Just because corporations have vast assets at their disposal, they cannot be kept from expressing their own political viewpoints.
These are such as are supposed best calculated to effect the object for which it was created.View Full Point of Law
Issue. This case considers whether a corporation is deprived of political speech, because of its corporate identity.
The court overturned the criminal statute, alleging that because it prohibited protected speech (contribution in furtherance of expressing corporate views), it should be invalidated.
Dissent. Justice Byron White (J. White) dissented, noting that there is a compelling state interest not to allow the corporate domination.
Discussion. A corporation, as an entity, is to be afforded the same freedom of expression of its political views as is an individual.