The concept of a "social contract" is regularly used to deny rights to prisoners.
It's not necessary, even to address the "paradox of tolerance", it's actively harmful, and it's erroneous anyway (contracts are necessarily consensual[^1], but exceptionally few people get to make a choice about the society they live in)
[^1]: Yes, this criteria invalidates a lot of modern contracts in the US especially around tech, but this is largely a failure of the judicial system. Legislation still makes it clear that contracts must be consensual in the US and other western countries, and it often goes further in that they must be reciprocal.
Worth clarifying that it requires individuals to insert backdoors if told to, it's not a blanket backdoor and frankly I'd be shocked if it held up in the high court.
Nothing ever makes it there though, and it's full of baked in secrecy. I don't use local or US services for anything where privacy is important for that reason.
Good thing Australia doesn't have electronic voting, hey?