Forgive me for lacking further specifics just now, but an anonymous
lawyer friend tells me that the May 11, 1999 edition of the "San
Francisco Daily Journal" reported that a federal district judge
declared a (n unspecified) city's ordinance --forbidding the wearing
of masks, hoods or any device in public to conceal one's identity
(except for religious, safety or medical reasons)-- as being
*unconstitutional* (!).
The city in question, according to this (so far) hearsay evidence,
was trying to discourage a Ku Klux Klan rally. The KKK claimed itself
a "religion" and that the hoods protect its members from retaliation
(how deliciously ironic). The court agreed that the mask ban was an
unconstitutional violation of the Klansmen's right to free speech and
to anonymous association in public.
Wow! First the Bernstein decision, and now this? Wait, someone pinch
me... I think I'm dreaming about the country I hope I live in, and
not the one I wake up to every day... Imagine: if both judgements
hold, anonymous posting of crypto source code will be
constitutionally protected (as it should be).
First Question: does anyone know which City is involved and/or where
the Judge's decision can be found? I'm afraid I don't have any more
info than what I've mentioned here, no date, no case name, etc.
Second Question: can anyone cite/remember any other federal court
decision that protects one's right to remain anonymous (other than
those protecting victims or people in federal witness protection
programs, etc)?
If true, this case may have fascinating implications for
internet-based forms of anonymous association such as using ZKS'
Freedom.Net service.
dave
