] I'm asking for a declaration from the court that would
] overturn the unconstitutional requirement that US persons
] must show ID to travel throughout the US. Not only
] airplanes, but trains, buses, cruise ships, and major
] hotel chains are now enforcing ID requirements, largely
] at the behest of the Federal Government.

This is actually a very interesting case. I scanned through a number of case documents. If Gillmore can prove that the ID requirement exists in most means of transportation then the government's arguments will fall, because the government is simply saying that its ok to restrict one form of travel if other options are available.

Whats more interesting is that Gillmore has provided a very compelling arguement that the "no-fly list" is unconstitutional because it is not limited to verifying that the people who fly are not carrying weapons. The defense the government offers is that Gillmore doesn't have standing to challenge the no-fly list because he's not on it. Gillmore counters that the "no-fly list" is the reason for the ID requirement and therefore he has a basis to challenge it. I'm not really clear on the standing issue after looking at these documents, but if he does have standing I think the "no-fly list" may fall, and if he doesn't, then the first person who does will probably topple it. Most of the people on the list are not the sort who make good plaintifs, but there have been examples of people who have the same NAME as people on the list who have been hassled. Any one of those people probably has standing and a reasonable arguement to end the practice.

politechbot.com: John Gilmore's suit over secret FAA regs in SF court on 1/17