🚀 go-pugleaf

     This item is quite amazing!  Possibly the most amazing thing about 
it is that it purports to be written by a law professor, when 
probably its most outstanding characteristic is a lack of legal 
realism.  Asking a superior court for a judicial declaration at the 
request of any citizen sounds like a formula for legal gridlock.  And 
some of the things a court is asked to decide upon, e.g., paying less 
than a fair share of taxes, are very murky; what basis is to be used 
in assessing a fair share?  Asking a superior court to decide on 
actions against the biosphere anywhere in the world (again, at the 
request of any citizen who cares to file suit) has obvious problems.  
And what is the role of the state's law enforcement mechanism 
(District Attorneys, state Attorney General, etc.)? 
    The idea itself is certainly worth thinking about--what are the 
circumstances under which a corporation (by the way, why not an 
individual or a sole proprietorship or a partnership?) gives up 
certain benefits it has been given by various levels of government.  
But it could certainly use some cleaning up!  I'd say run it by some 
lawyers but the advice obviously has some limitations...
     Finally , the writer(s) of this item have no hesitation about 
telling everybody what's good for them.  They have listed exactly 
what are all the "bad" things a company could be "pushing"--tobacco, 
guns, beef, non-renewable energy, cars that get less than 40 mpg!  
Aside from the arrogance, a better strategy to get an initiative on 
the ballot and passed would be to avoid alienating everybody but 
vegetarian nonsmokers who drive small cars...
                         Merlin Dorfman
                         DORFMAN@NETCOM.COM