alt Hacker NewsYou're just vaguely waving towards the first amendment. That's not a cohesive argument in and of itself.
By your own logic would online ID laws not also be a constitutional violation? Ditto for age bracketing laws such as the one under discussion here. After all, they both effectively regulate one half of the exchange necessary for meaningful communication (ie protected speech).
> Impressums cannot be required in the US
Yes but why can't they be required? My (quite possibly flawed) understanding was that SCOTUS previously established that publishing without attribution could not directly be outlawed, recognizing the ability to speak anonymously as an important aspect of political speech. What I have described does not run afoul of that. It neither restricts one's ability to speak nor provides for any form of attribution.
> “Redressing a concrete dysfunction” does not appear in the Constitution as an exemption to guaranteed rights
Regardless of either your or my personal opinion SCOTUS routinely makes exceptions to constitutional rights when a compelling need is presented and the remedy is sufficiently targeted. That said, I don't believe that what I described infringes on the first amendment to begin with so your point is doubly moot.
> By your own logic would online ID laws not also be a constitutional violation? Ditto for age bracketing laws such as the one under discussion here.
Now you’re getting it. Throw them all out along with the idiots who passed the laws.
> Yes but why can't they be required?
The Court has interpreted compelled speech to be almost universally a violation of the First Amendment, outside of the courtroom. I tend to agree. “Shall make no law” is a strong statement.
> SCOTUS routinely makes exceptions to constitutional rights
Prior courts. The present Court seems to be (rightly) rolling back both judicially-granted overexpansion of rights and exceptions to rights, although this is a slow process.
We have to stop relying on the courts to grant new rights and/or exemptions to rights. Passing unconstitutional bills and hoping for a favorable interpretation is clearly not the intended process, yet it’s become increasingly common.
We need to figure out how to pass amendments again or we are going to lose our republic. (It may already be too late due to an out of control executive and corrupt Congress, but that’s another matter.)