nielson: yeah. jubarrett: what do you think about that? mr. fletcher told us what he thought about the dangers that would lie in either approach. mr. nielson: yeah, si very worried not about this law. i think we're going to pass strict scrutiny. i hope that that is where the co, that this law passes strict scrin i am worriut my strip club example or any other sexually oriented businesses. if we start saying that the standard is strict scrutiny, i hope this court says, "oh, it passes strict scrutiny." but there's a whole bunch of law on strict scrutiny and a whole bunch of diffeudges across this countryoing to apply it. there's a bunch of cases that say fatal in fact. and we're going to have a lot of pi's and a lot of emergen litigation. that's a problem, a real world -- justice kagan: but that wouldn't be true necessarily, if we wro the kind of opinion that mr. fletcher had in mind, right? because then you would say, "this is the kind of strict scrutiny we're talking about. this is what will pass it

nielson: yeah. justice barrett: what do you think about that? mr. fletcher told us what he thought about the dangers that would lie in either approach. mr. nielson: yeah, so i am very worried not about this law. i think we're goi tpass i hope that that is where the court is, that this law passes strict scrutiny. i am worried about my strip club example or anyth sexually oriented businesses. if we stt ying that the stda is strict scrutiny, i hope this court says, "oh, that's ok. it passes strict scrutiny. but there's a whole bunch of law on strict scrutiny and wle bunch of different judges across this country are going to apply it. there's a bunch of cases that say fatal in fact. and we're going to ha aot of pi's and a lot of emergency litigation. th's a problem, a real world -- justice kagan: but that w't be true necessarily, if we wrote the kind of opinion th m fletcher had in mind, right? "this is the kind of strict scrutiny we're talking about. this is what will pass it. take us seriouy. mr. niel

nielson: c. justice sotomayor: but in that interim, whei receive the information, before i make the choice, i could just give it o another entity. my name, when i visit a website, unless i've prohibited the viewing history, everything is automatically transferred to other people. i'm wrong about that.ay that again, i don't know the technology -- justice sotomayor: well, that's the point, because i d't know. mr. nielson: i don't know how you do it. but i went anyway, so this is why it's important. justicmayor: that's once you get to a trial, and somebody figure out. mr. nielson: i'm saying that under the fifth cir's view of the law, which this court did not grant cert to review, biometric scanning is ok. so there's no identifying formation to even turn over. so it wouldn't make. even if you transferred it, you're not transfe identifying informat identifying information, no one does it. again, i point to ief, to the age verification association -- justice sotomayor: we're talking in a vacuum cae i