The reason this wrongheaded theory of corporate personhood was made law in the case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company was because in 1886 railroads were the most powerful political force in America. I recommend Frank Norris's groundbreaking 1901 novel "The Octopus" for a contemporary look at the insidious nature of their influence.
   If corporations are persons with the rights of citizens then why don't they vote in our elections.
   Some have argued in this thread that to say this ruling gives corporations undue influence on our political system is to say that the American people are stupid. I won't comment on the relative intelligence of Americans but I will pass along David Ogilvie's first rule of advertising: IT WORKS. Did you ever wonder how a company (MacDonald's) can be the absolutely most successful in their industry while offering the most inferior product. It's simple. They sell the most "food" because they buy the most advertising and this applies to every commercial endeavor in the world. To say this ruling equally abets corporations and unions is a canard when corporations can outspend unions, or any other activists, hundreds to one, a point brilliantly made by Bill D's bridge example.
    Saying this ruling restores free speech to the USA is saying that no other nation in the world has freedom of speech because no other nation would even dream of giving corporations such overwhelming power to influence their political process.
Would anyone have wanted the anti-semitic, fascist sympathizer Henry Ford to have had even more influence on our body politic in 1941.
   I have heard more than one commentator say this is the worst court ruling since Dred Scott. I say we are on our way to a "Brave New World".