PJ wrote me in email:

A slight correction. The ``bernstein etc.'' cases are not about the right to have strong crypto. There is no United States law forbidding one from having or using crypto, hard, soft, or squishy. Those cases challenge regulations that keep one from publishing information about crypto including cryptographic software. Even if it were made illegal to use hard crypto, it would still be a violation of the First Amendment for the government to require a license before one is allowed to publish information about crypto or anything else.

I consider it a violation of free speech if the government made "hard crypto" illegal. yes, these cases are generally challenging the publishing aspects of crypto in the US, but this is not what I consider the most important constitutional ingredient in favor of crypto. crypto is essentially a kind of speech, or communication. hence restricting it would be like outlawing a certain foreign language that the government doesn't understand. in my opinion, this is the most important, root case to be made for the use of crypto in this country. publishing crypto algorithms is only a side issue compared to this, imho. so the bottom line is this: crypto regulations can be challenged under the idea that they are restricting freedom of the press, i.e. for academics to discuss algorithms, or it can be challenged under freedom of speech issues, i.e. everyone has the right to use codes for whatever purpose. currently because the regulations prohibit the "export" of crypto code, the first route is the basic challenge that makes the most sense. but I'd like to see the ITAR challenged on the second grounds as well, i.e. as a free speech issue. there's less reason when the gov't is not trying to regulate domestic crypto, but it might be a relevant angle in the export debate. BTW, I understand that there are cases being made by Karn, Junger, and Bernstein, is that correct? with Junger being the most recent? does anyone have web pages dedicated to each one of these? thanks;