How can I object to that scheme?

So I'm going to answer your question, but let me maybe level set a little bit about the First Amendment and its implications.

application here.

So the speech clause of the First Amendment, as most of you know, says Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech and of the press.

Okay, so in the context of AI, what might we be concerned about in the speech context and what might Congress or the states try to regulate? So I think, you know, as a first order concern, we're concerned about losing cognitive autonomy, about de-skilling, about offloading our thinking process to machines.

And the First Amendment, you know, at root, those are its words, but at root, its conception is that we need to be able, we free people in a republic need to be able to think what we will and express what we might, and that machines are interfering with that.

Okay, so how might they interfere with that? I can just list a few of the concerns, which you should feel free to add to them.

Can you walk us through just the sort of First Amendment landscape in the world of AI?

Is there any existing precedent for a First Amendment right of equal access to a government official's communications?

I think yes and no.

So the basic law, First Amendment law, is that there is no right of access to government information outside of sort of criminal justice, court access context.

However, when the government decides to make information public, and that's its choice, it then can't condition access or it can't restrict access.

One, based on viewpoint or the content.

That doesn't seem to be what's going on here.

But two, it also can't do it for just illegitimate or arbitrary reasons.

So to your point that the amendment prohibits granting preferential access to government information for arbitrary and irrational reasons, how do you think the court should evaluate this claim?