Re: Right to pr0n overruled

danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> writes:

[snip]

Yes, but the only practical way to verify people's age en masse is to
require them to provide an identity document, which typically provides
more info than just the person's age.

So please tell me why Clarence Thomas is right and I'm wrong. The ruling
seems to be at odd with the various cases that the First Amendment
protects anonymous speech (well, publishing). Why doesn't the First
Amendment protect anonymity here?

and let's ask Robert Bork, too.

You whooshed me. I don't know what reported opinions with regard to
speech and publishing he wrote on the D.C. Circuit Court.