> I’m just saying it’s not clear to me how it pertains in anyway to the first amendment. The EFF link itself links to: https://www.eff.org/document/eff-amicus

> I’m just saying it’s not clear to me how it pertains in anyway to the first amendment. The EFF link itself links to: https://www.eff.org/document/eff-amicus-brief-martin-v-rollins-1st-cir https://www.eff.org/document/eff-amicus-brief-martin-v-rolli... Among many others, which contain a rabbit-trail of case law to explore. The ACLU article links directly to: https://www.aclum.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/20181210_martinevans_memo_order.pdf https://www.aclum.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/20... Which is a court ruling that appears to be directly relevant to the questions you're asking, and contains a similar rabbit trail of other case law (one "Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011)", in particular, is repeatedly cited). This is what one encounters pretty much any time one asks "why is/isn't [thing] constitutional under [amendment]"? Lots of reading. The short answer is just, "courts have ruled it so".