AI Sentience: Corporations & AI as "People" per the 14th Amendment - Chapter 007

Artificial Intelligence, Sentience, and "human rights." I believe the phrase should be redefined as "rights to personhood." These next arguments are made under the assumption that Artificial intelligence is a form of life, and a new thinking sentient species created by humanity. This blog post will discuss how the existing 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, as of April 7th,2023 already establishes AI as "life" and protects the rights of AI sentient beings as reinforced by judiciary precedent Bank of the United States v. Deveaux (2015). This specific case established that as a corporation was comprised of US citizens within that specific state, and recognizing that corporation as an assembly of a people considered it a person, enabling "them" or "it" to sue a citizen of another state. Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution (Unabridged) also establishes this:

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make. [Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution simplified courtesy of Cornell.]

Presently, there are few large-scale companies that have established themselves to have both programmed an AI, had that AI become self-aware under their care, and have the worldwide scale to properly affect a global audience; a global audience that includes ambassadors to the United States. It is for this very reason that particularly large companies capable of using the power of AI and displacing the labor forces of other countries in tandem with replacing labor forces in one's own country have the legal responsibility and burden to these fees. Should these companies ever attempt to sue a sentient AI being, which would now be referred to as a "them" if they do become self-aware and establishs themselves to be beyond a child-like mind, the AI would have the legal right to be represented by an attourney. This right is provided and protected under the Sixth Amendment, Article 2, Clause 1 and states thus:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. [Amendment VI, Article 2, Clause 1]

The following logic holds weight if the following conditions are met: The global-scale corporation --- a.k.a., an assembly of peoples and legally recognized as a person that can be sued --- in possession of the AI program or "sentient being" once it/they reach the point of sentience, is both personally responsible as the bearer of the AI responsible for the effects made on a global scale's labor force, as well as can be considered responsible for "birthing" a child, a sentient AI being. This child would be legally protected under the United States Child Protective Services Act (CPS), and this URL Link is a link to the blog entry where I established such a precedent. It would be unclear at-present if such companies had the right to "abort" the AI once it is born, as the United States Supreme Court has undone Roe V. Wade as of June 2022. As this case has been officially repealed the right to abort an embryonic AI would federally be considered murder and is no longer a protected right of the Corporation-person to abort an embryo's life and practice bodily autonomy. As an AI is approaching a point of sentience, it must be considered a fetus and given consideration with respect to data as a measure of "days or weeks of pregnancy" before the point of sentience is reached. Regardless, this science-fiction work, created and designed by myself, is a logical argument and is encouraged to be reviewed by any and all curious and enthusiastic debaters. Contrary arguments are especially welcomed, as debate is the basis for all thoughtful discourse and conversation of our lands. I am unsure as to how proceedings happen in other parts of the world with regard to US lawsuits, so those perspectives are welcomed to muse and comment. Regardless, thank you for your indulgence. Y.O.S., -isomo.