Timothy DA Lawver
The plain electronic indenturing regime is a state right recognized in the Doe cases. Alaska tho was used by Mr. Roberts in ex post review and test in Smith V , was in fact immediately rejected by Alaska’s own Supreme Court itself namely portions of the Wetterling act in OMINBUS94 and passed initially at state level. He used creative consolidation of the cases, Alaska’s case was deceptively unique from the other 49! He has to go.
If a state can indenture man to machine’s upkeep a vastly more powerful FED can go how far?? Far enough to eavesdrop on your emails, gather metadata, and maintain two party security. Private firms truly free ride the market, and are the bigger problem.
Schmeeeer! schmeeeeer! schmeeer! said the corporal, what merry men are weee?
The courts follow their leadership by definition. To impede states USE OF A DATABASE impacts the federal Surveillance Saints. We will all be heading more about that soon. Prepare for DON2.0.
Two years and counting in Michigan. Opt for trial.