|
I'd agree that it's not necessarily a first amendment issue, since there's no government entity involved. However, what it may be is a RICO violation. The RICO statute allows (I believe, I'm not a lawyer) for a pattern of intimidation to provide revenue ar other material gainto be illegal. If the people who threatened to pull their funds conspired to to it together, that a pattern. And if they were getting something from the proposed merger, say building contracts or something similar, that's a material gain, so maybe RICO applies where the first amendment doesn't.
And I know that people have tried to file suits against employers under RICO, and that RICO can be applied to non-criminal cases. The problem is, it's usuallythe government that files RICO cases,soI don't think one person is going to have any luck with it.
A little left field, but it's my two cents.
__________________
I'm gonna be rich and famous, as soon I invent a device that lets you stab people in the face over the internet.
|