Okay, overturn the case law - state your thesis and advance a novel argument.
So far I’ve seen driving:traveling::printing:speech. Not only is that not an argument, it conveniently overlooks that we have restrictions on speech today - libel and slander, incitement, etc.
What is your thesis? Driving should be completely unconstrained by the state? Why? Or is it that we should have national IDs? Why?
Nothing is ever truly settled. Pointlessly respecting jurisprudence without regard for time and society is a recipe for contempt of the law.