If it is actually produced by the federal government, it can’t be open source because it is already public domain.
“Public money, public code” either refers, in the US, exclusively to state governments, or it applies to software developed under government contracts (and possibly other software purchased by government), not just software developed by the government itself.
I did my research and the public domain mandate for federal works apparently doesn't apply to the states. Some states actually enforce their copyrights and have whole licensing systems for state government-produced works.
Isn't this a whole 1st Amendment violation? The law is intended for private parties and the 1st is incorporated to the states since a very long time. Has anyone sued over this?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Where is the connection to requiring anything to be put in the public domain?
By enforcing copyright law, states restrict the freedom of speech of their citizens by prohibiting/going after certain kinds of expression (someone relying the state government's own speech is in itself speech)
In order to not be unconstitutional, therefore, copyright law should be interpreted as not protecting state works.
Correct, but the 1st is stronger. This is why fair use even exists. In order to coexist with the first amendment, the copyright clause must allow some wiggle room for freedom of expression and balancing the rightsholder's interests with society's.
Since these "safety valves" exist even for enforcement of the copyrights of private parties, a state government's enforcement would be even more, if not entirely thwarted by the free speech clause.
The Copyright Clause is explicit about the authority of Congress to grant exclusivity. You're not going to get anywhere with an argument that it contravenes the First Amendment. They were ratified almost simultaneously.
We could still have “Public money, public code” by having the government leasing planes from private companies, so the government would just be operating a service provided by the private sector, and wouldn’t be entitled to get the code delivered to us.
So if I am closed source SaaS solution and government pays monthly fee - my code should be public domain as well?
I don’t see this working other way than government spending money rebuilding each SaaS solution on their own. Then spending more running and operating it all from ground up.
Which would be very costly and no one would like to pay for it with their taxes.
“Public money, public code” either refers, in the US, exclusively to state governments, or it applies to software developed under government contracts (and possibly other software purchased by government), not just software developed by the government itself.