Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

U.S. Supreme Court: Public Anonymity No Right

Posted by timothy on from the facial-recognition-renders-this-a-moot-point dept.

Anonymous Arrestee writes "Today the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that anybody can be compelled at any time to identify themselves, if a police officer asks. People who refuse to identify themselves, even if they are not suspected of a crime, will be arrested. Sound Orwellian? The Supreme Court also said people who are suspected of another crime might not be subject to arrest for not revealing their name. On this latter point, someone will have to bring a separate case. And the SCOTUS is at liberty not to hear any case it doesn't like. The case is Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada [pdf]. Previous Slashdot story here."

2 of 1,492 comments (clear)

  1. "And the SCOTUS is at liberty not to hear any case by mandalayx · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    "And the SCOTUS is at liberty not to hear any case it doesn't like."

    How does that make sense at all?

    I think this law seems pretty shitty, but that line seemed a bit like flamebait to me.

    "Sound Orwellian?"

    Yes it does to me, but the commentary in the news article isn't necessary. Let me come to my own opinion, thanks.

    PS - there is also a ruling on Intel v. AMD from today (see the SCOTUS website) but I wasn't able to sort through the legalese.

  2. Re:Easy way out by lewp · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Doh! Now we'll never catch Osama.

    --
    Game... blouses.