Thank you, Can. Since 1997, the Supreme Court has taken the approach that where domestic law is silent, international law should fill the lacuna. In constitutional cases, we argue international law. We argue comparative law. But what I have found is that it is constitutional law that mostly occupies the field. One of the cases I argued along with other counsel in 2005 is still the definitive case on online free speech regarding the striking down of a provision of the Information Technology Act that governs the internet. The actual words of the law are quite intriguing—any language that was online, defined as a text message or something on a website, that was annoying or inconvenient “could lead to a three-year prison sentence.”