1. United States
2. Letter

Apply strict scrutiny to all age verification laws, especially Texas'. As summer approaches I admit that I am filled with dread at the implication that due to the religious beliefs of several members of the court, the ruling will go against established constitutional speech protections just because the speech is sexual in nature. Strict scrutiny and privacy should be protected and upheld solely because what one person considers obscene or contemptuous, another person may find value in it. It may be the only way they can express themselves authentically. There was a time in years long past when Catholicism was outlawed and censored by Protestant rulers and judges. If the time comes when an anti-Christian extremist comes into power, and they appoint judges who receive a case similar to the Paxton case concerning objections to passages in the Old and New Testament, or to the circumstances of virginal birth, they will likely go to the very ruling you made. If they apply rational basis in response to blocked Catholic material online, then they would determine that the law blocking access would deserve more priority than the rights of Christians to access religious texts online. There IS objectional material in these texts: Sexual assault, child murders, death, genocide, rape, animal abuse, kidnapping and forced marriage. The protection of minors from the material in the Bible overrides the rights of practicing Christians according to rational basis. See how this can be flipped around? Strict scrutiny is very important to protect the rights of adults while considering the protection of minors. Please don't undo precedent.