公司与第三条中“公民”的原意

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW
M. Moller, Lawrence B. Solum
{"title":"公司与第三条中“公民”的原意","authors":"M. Moller, Lawrence B. Solum","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3548143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Article III grants confers the judicial power of the United States over controversies between \"citizens\" of different states. In Section 1332(c) of Title 28 of the United States Code, Congress has provided that for the purposes of diversity jurisdiction, corporations are citizens of the state in which they are incorporated and the state in which their principal place of business is located. This raises the question whether corporations are citizens within the original public meaning of Article III of the Constitution. This Article demonstrates that in 1787 the word \"citizen\" referred only to natural persons and therefore that corporations cannot be considered \"citizens\" within the original public meaning of Article III. As a consequence, Section 1332(c) is unconstitutional from an originalist perspective. (This is the most current version as of August 9, 2020.)","PeriodicalId":46736,"journal":{"name":"Hastings Law Journal","volume":"72 1","pages":"169"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Corporations and the Original Meaning of 'Citizens' in Article III\",\"authors\":\"M. Moller, Lawrence B. Solum\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.3548143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Article III grants confers the judicial power of the United States over controversies between \\\"citizens\\\" of different states. In Section 1332(c) of Title 28 of the United States Code, Congress has provided that for the purposes of diversity jurisdiction, corporations are citizens of the state in which they are incorporated and the state in which their principal place of business is located. This raises the question whether corporations are citizens within the original public meaning of Article III of the Constitution. This Article demonstrates that in 1787 the word \\\"citizen\\\" referred only to natural persons and therefore that corporations cannot be considered \\\"citizens\\\" within the original public meaning of Article III. As a consequence, Section 1332(c) is unconstitutional from an originalist perspective. (This is the most current version as of August 9, 2020.)\",\"PeriodicalId\":46736,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hastings Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"169\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hastings Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3548143\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hastings Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3548143","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

第三条授予美国对各州“公民”之间争议的司法权。在《美国法典》第28篇第1332(c)节中,国会规定,就多样性管辖而言,公司是其注册所在州及其主要营业地所在州的公民。这就提出了一个问题,即公司是否是《宪法》第三条最初公共含义范围内的公民。该条款表明,1787年,“公民”一词仅指自然人,因此,公司不能被视为第三条最初公共含义中的“公民”。因此,从原始主义的角度来看,第1332(c)条是违宪的。(这是截至2020年8月9日的最新版本。)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Corporations and the Original Meaning of 'Citizens' in Article III
Article III grants confers the judicial power of the United States over controversies between "citizens" of different states. In Section 1332(c) of Title 28 of the United States Code, Congress has provided that for the purposes of diversity jurisdiction, corporations are citizens of the state in which they are incorporated and the state in which their principal place of business is located. This raises the question whether corporations are citizens within the original public meaning of Article III of the Constitution. This Article demonstrates that in 1787 the word "citizen" referred only to natural persons and therefore that corporations cannot be considered "citizens" within the original public meaning of Article III. As a consequence, Section 1332(c) is unconstitutional from an originalist perspective. (This is the most current version as of August 9, 2020.)
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Hastings College of the Law was founded in 1878 as the first law department of the University of California, and today is one of the top-rated law schools in the United States. Its alumni span the globe and are among the most respected lawyers, judges and business leaders today. Hastings was founded in 1878 as the first law department of the University of California and is one of the most exciting and vibrant legal education centers in the nation. Our faculty are nationally renowned as both teachers and scholars.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信