Corporate Accountability


At issue in FCC v. AT&T was whether corporations are entitled to “personal privacy” under the Freedom of Information Act.

Case Summary

CAC filed a brief in this case on November 16, 2010, that helped answer that question by looking at how the Supreme Court has dealt with similar issues under the Constitution throughout our nation’s history. Like the APA, the Constitution uses the term “persons” (not “corporations”) and the Court, like Congress, has held in a number of contexts that corporations can be treated as “persons” for some purposes related to their legitimate business interests. But, throughout our history, the Court has also treated corporations as fictional persons – qualitatively different from human beings – and consistently held that only living, breathing human beings possess the dignity interests protected by privacy rights.

CAC’s brief argued that FOIA, like our Constitution, protects corporations and human beings differently, and for different reasons. In our brief, we discussed a long line of constitutional cases in which the Court has distinguished between the rights of individuals and those of corporations, particularly in the context of privacy, and argue that the Court should draw a similar distinction in interpreting FOIA. Our brief built off the work CAC has done on “corporate personhood,” both in our narrative, A Capitalist Joker, and in our brief in Citizens United v. FEC.

On March 1, 2011, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of the FCC as CAC had urged, rejecting AT&T’s meritless argument that corporations are entitled to “personal privacy” under the Freedom of Information Act.

Case Timeline

More from Corporate Accountability

Corporate Accountability
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: In narrow ruling, Supreme Court rejects baseless effort to shield corporate-derived income from taxation

WASHINGTON, DC – Following this morning’s decision at the Supreme Court in Moore v. United...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Corporate Accountability
June 13, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court’s Disappointing Decision in Starbucks Union Case Fails to Account for History

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney,...
By: Smita Ghosh
Corporate Accountability
May 30, 2024

Supreme Court gives New Yorkers second shot in escrow interest-payment fight

Courthouse News Service
WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court on Thursday gave New York homeowners another shot at...
By: Smita Ghosh, Kelsey Reichmann
Corporate Accountability
May 30, 2024

RELEASE: Grounded in Text and History, Today’s Decision is a Win for America’s Consumers

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Cantero v. Bank of...
By: Smita Ghosh
Corporate Accountability
May 15, 2024

The Fifth Circuit Is In the Tank For Corporate Power

Balls and Strikes
When the government does things that megacorporations don’t like, they know exactly where to go...
Corporate Accountability
April 23, 2024

RELEASE: At the Supreme Court, Starbucks’s Arguments Run Headlong into the History of American Labor Law

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Starbucks v....
By: Smita Ghosh