3 ms·

I do think a current justice is much more qualified to talk about how the court views and understands technology then we are... Regardless, in this case, a wel

I do think a current justice is much more qualified to talk about how the court views and understands technology then we are... Regardless, in this case, a well-written amicus brief from technology leaders could also shape some of the ideology that would come to play, and I think it would be respected because they would be subject experts.

rayiner 13y ago
I agree amicus briefs can be helpful, and for an example of how, read Reno v. ACLU, in which the Court struck down portions of the Communications Decency Act: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1557224836887427725&q=reno+v+aclu&hl=en&as_sdt=6,39 http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1557224836887427.... Specifically, read the Eastern District of Pennsylvania's Findings of Fact in the case, which the Supreme Court quotes extensively in its opinion: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7999801392201013395&q=reno+v+aclu&hl=en&as_sdt=6,39 http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7999801392201013... (Section II). It's a very cogent description of the internet as it worked in 1996. I can't read something like that, which even goes to the length of describing how the internet uses packet-switching, and conclude that judges as a group don't have a grasp of how Facebook works.