The Supreme Court is considering a case of "Papers, Please?" In other words, if the police think you may have been involved in a crime and ask you to identify yourself, do you have to answer?

That is the question before the US Supreme Court Monday, as the justices consider whether a Nevada law requiring suspects to identify themselves whenever requested by police violates constitutional protections of privacy and freedom from self-incrimination. The case is significant because it gives the court a chance to more closely define how deeply law-enforcement officials may intrude into private lives.

If the court establishes a bright-line rule barring police from forcing such disclosures, it will highlight a new focus by the justices on individual liberty. If, on the other hand, the court upholds the Nevada law, it could prompt other states and the federal government to adopt similar tactics amid heightened concern about possible terrorist activities within the US.

The case involves Dudley Hiibel, a Nevada citizen who refused to provide his name to a deputy sheriff. Hiibel's position, with which we agree, is the police can ask, but you shouldn't have to answer.