Yes, I knew precisely what she was referring to.

I raised my point in an interest in correcting a commonly held view among some uninformed partisans regarding Citizens United, that being that CU suddenly out of nowhere created this concept of "corporate personhood" which had never before been imagined by the US Courts.

This view, of course, is false. The Court, in the CU case, simply extended (controversially, obviously) a concept which has been part of US law for two centuries.

It's also moot at this point, since the Democrats now seem to be just as dependent on corporation donations as the GOP is. Political parties tend not to cut off their noses to spite their faces.