] In plaintiffs' case, he was not required to provide
] identification on pain of criminal or other governmental
] sanction. Identification requests unaccompanied by
] detention, arrest, or any other penalty, other than the
] significant inconvenience of being unable to fly, do not
] amount to a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth
] Amendment. Plaintiff has not suggested that he felt that
] he was not free to leave when he was asked to produce
] [*15] identification.

In other words, the government can require ID for any purpose unless you are completely prohibited from engaging in a constitutionally protected activity if you don't comply with the ID request. The judge goes on to say that a requirement for ID checks to fly doesn't impact your freedom to travel/associate because you could reach your destination by other means.

Cross country travel by airplane takes a day, whereas driving takes a week. One must presume that the court has no concern for convenience/practicality here. Therefore it follows that the government could require an ID check with warrant/database cross reference for every form of transportation/lodging based on the theory that you can still WALK between destinations and sleep outside.

Gilmore seems like a crackpot here only because he is thinking way into the future. If the 4th amendment really is this limited, then you can rest assured that over the course of the next 20 years the ID/database requirements will fill into every crack and crevase possible without totally preventing freedom of association.

Ultimately, this is not compatible with the common people's understanding of what the 4th Amendment means, and it will result in a Constituional Amendment.

Honestly, I think that this judge is wrong. Warrant checkpoints are random searches, even if you don't have to go through them. To argue otherwise is to completely miss the spirit of the 4th amendment. If the British had told the Warehouse operators in the Boston Harbor that they could avoid random searches of their storage areas so long as they didn't transport their goods by sea I think they would have been just as angry about it.