3 ms·
I think your interpretation, even if correct, is not the current position of the legislature. This post and the thread attached to it is about how it's currentl
by ibejoeb 6mo ago
I think your interpretation, even if correct, is not the current position of the legislature. This post and the thread attached to it is about how it's currently happening. Personally, I don't see a future where you don't have a digital ID. If the government can compel you to provide an ID to, say, travel or operate a vehicle in public, I don't see a compelling 1A argument that it can't do the same to operate computing device on the public internet.
- crazygringo 6mo agoWhile I don't agree on your characterization of the legislature, it doesn't even matter. That's the whole purpose of having checks and balances, and a Supreme Court that can strike down unconstitutional legislation. And your analogy between driving a vehicle and posting on a website doesn't work because there is no constitutional protection for driving vehicles or taking commercial air flights. However there is a constitutional protection for speech, above all political speech. That's the difference.