Ciara Torres-Spelliscy

Draws on key Supreme Court cases to explore how corporations have, more often than not, been on the wrong side of history by working to undermine democratic norms, practices, and laws. Explains why and how they should be held accountable by the courts, their shareholders, and citizens themselves.

Argues that the Supreme Court should have taken judicial notice of the post-January 6 circumstances which surround the Percoco decision.

Examines the political branding of Asian immigrants by comparing the rhetoric used in the political platforms of the Democratic and Republican parties from 1876 to 1924 to the language deployed in U.S. Supreme Court opinions during the same time period.

Explores the legal framework for the use of commercial branding and advertising techniques in presidential political campaigns, as well as the impact of politics on commercial brands.

Discusses how Trump's political career has impacted his commercial brand, and vice-versa.

Explores how, over the course of American history, corporations have aggressively sought to expand their constitutional rights, and examines the responses from investors, customers, and lawmakers to expanded corporate power.

Argues that the Supreme Court is neglecting its traditional role policing the boundary between Church and State, as well as policing the boundary between politics and the economy.