That just means your views are not very controversial (most people’s aren’t).
The argument you’re making is just a different face of the “I have nothing to hide” in the privacy debates.
The argument you’re making is just a different face of the “I have nothing to hide” in the privacy debates.
This is nowhere controversial.
Try to be a constitutional originalist in the Sillicon Valley / tech sites, and we'll continue this conversation...
I don't think it's as rare or controversial as you think, many people just haven't formed a full opinion on judicial interpretation. Textualism in particular appeals to STEM folks. We've needlessly politicized them as Red Team vs Blue Team, when they don't see themselves as anything close to that. They're all first and foremost legal nerds.
Now if you're making pro-life arguments wrapped with original intent, I can see you getting some aggressive pushback.