Abstract
Does the First Amendment protect computer code from being compelled by the government? As society becomes more reliant on coded devices— like pacemakers, insulin pumps, and even some baby bassinets—courts will need to grapple with this question. In considering compulsions related to code, this Article concludes that intermediate scrutiny is almost always the appropriate standard of review. Rather than expressing a particular viewpoint, code generally constitutes a functional and neutral script. Given that a machine’s interpretation of code generally results in an objective action, not a subjective belief, the government need only show in most instances that the compulsion furthers a significant government interest. Accordingly, this Article argues that many requests for code compulsions are likely constitutional and will warrant compliance on the part of technology companies.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
