I actually don’t agree with one of the arguments presented in the brief and I wish that argument was not presented by narsol. The last argument presents an alternative of using an identifying code on the back of the license. How long do you think it will take for not only the public to figure out what it means, but the news to report it? That alternative only delays the problem. The court probably never considered that alternative until it was presented. The other arguments have enough merit to stand alone. One argument that wasn’t presented though is to question how this law or the inappropriate alternative furthers the states interests. Are parents going to start asking everyone for their license? Are at risk children going to ask for id prior to being assaulted? This law has no justification at all.