Federal ID and our rights...

[hogdogs]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...est=latestnews

Under the potentially controversial plan still taking shape in the Senate, all legal U.S. workers, including citizens and immigrants, would be issued an ID card with embedded information, such as fingerprints, to tie the card to the worker.

I am not in the conspiracy theory crowd at all... I do agree we need to curb illegal immigration but not at the cost of my personal liberty.

I am having a hard time finding the writing but I remember from Civics I class that I learned something along the lines of "No natural born citizen shall be required to carry papers to identify one's self..."

If that is correct I think this federal ID stomps that into the mud.

Brent

[carguychris]

I don't really see the gun content here, but I'll say this anyway.

... I do agree we need to curb illegal immigration but not at the cost of my personal liberty.

There's really no effective way to do the first without affecting the second. Any scheme that will curtail illegal immigration by a measurable degree will require punishing the companies employing them and/or allowing local law enforcement to arrest people for immigration violations, and neither can be done fairly without readily available, non-falsifiable ID that positively shows one's citizenship status.

We as Americans need to ask whether we are ready to live in a society where a traffic cop can pull us over and ask for our driver's license and immigration papers.

This is the Elephant in the Room in the immigration debate, and few of the advocates of immigration reform seem to want to talk about it.

[BlueTrain]

If you think immigration is such a big problem, you've been misled. The basic problem, as I see it, is our preference for importing manufactured products as opposed to making them here at home the way we used to, mostly. We have certainly been exporting jobs, that's for sure. Our wealth has gone overseas. Now the funny thing is, we seem to be importing labor to do the work that's still here.

There's no difference between legal immigration and illegal immigration other than the legality. Aren't you glad you don't have to have papers to move to another state? If you just had the bus fare out of town!

[stargazer65]

Carguychris:
I don't really see the gun content here, but I'll say this anyway.

It's OK, no gun content required in L&CR, I think it meets the rules:

Discussions in this forum will be centered upon legal issues as they relate to the 2nd Amendment and other Civil Rights. Constitutional law (which would encompass separation of powers, the impairment of contracts clause, the full faith and credit clause, etc., as well as the Bill of Rights) will also be on topic.

It seems like this issue pops up from time to time, but it always get squashed. I'm thankful for that preservation of liberty... besides I already have too many IDs now to keep track of renewal dates.

[Sefner]

National ID cards fix the symptom, not the cause. We will continue to have illegal immigration until there is no more benefit for people to risk coming here illegally. Whether this is through making it easier to get in legally, take away the benefits that people come for (health care and jobs), or "exporting" those benefits (ie: helping to better other nation's health care systems and economies).

[bob.a]

Illegal immigration is a self-limiting problem. It will end when enough folks have immigrated and enough jobs have been exported to make the US no more attractive than staying home.

I give it about 50 years. I plan to be dead by then.

[Hkmp5sd]

I am having a hard time finding the writing but I remember from Civics I class that I learned something along the lines of "No natural born citizen shall be required to carry papers to identify one's self..."

1. My state driver's license already contains a data strip on the back. Carries useful information such as the fact I am a diabetic.

2. The government already has a dozen copies of my fingerprints.

3. Get stopped by a LEO without ID and see how going around without "identity papers" works out. You will most likely be detained until your identity can be proven.

[hogdogs]

Hk,

Well the states can impose laws that the feds cannot...

For many years and thru many traffic stops and other LEO contacts, I rarely carried ID. I never was detained for this. I just rattled off my ID number and they ran it that way.

Brent

[Hkmp5sd]

One thing that did surprise me is that neither the Florida driver's license nor the tag on your car lets an LEO know that you also possess a state CCW.

[mapsjanhere]

Legal permanent residents already carry such a card, including the fingerprint. So for us it's a non-starter.

[BlueTrain]

I'm not certain it was true but I've read that "papers" were required to travel from state to state in the Confederacy. Mind you, I wasn't around then to have verified it first hand.

[Baba Louie]

I understand that Nevada is going forward with their Real ID program this year which ought to prove interesting for all the homeless here in Las Vegas since you'll need to bring your birth cert, proof of permanent residency, proof of social security number. Looking at my 1970 issued SSN card, it must be a misprint when it is written "For Social Security and Tax Purposes - Not For Identification". I understand the new cards no longer contain that "misprint".
http://www.dmvnv.com/newlicense/index.htm

The Real ID Act requires all applicants to show proof of identity, date of birth, social security number, lawful status and primary residence address to obtain a state-issued Real ID driver license or identification card that is accepted for official federal purposes. Get your documents ready.

Anyone whose current name differs from that on their birth certificate will also have to show proof of the legal name change. A Marriage Certificate is sufficient for married women. Those who have been through multiple name changes because of marriage and divorce will have to show proof of each change.

I know several women here who have been through 3 or 4 marriages (name changes). Ought to be fun gathering all that info and lugging it to the DMV to be entered into the "record" (database).

I originally thought it was all about "terrorism, war on" as it is part of the DHS overall scheme of things, but maybe it is about immigration control in this land o' liberty.

Interesting that so many states have chosen to opt out at this time.

Expect Mission Creep.

[carguychris]

3. Get stopped by a LEO without ID and see how going around without "identity papers" works out. You will most likely be detained until your identity can be proven.

Not necessarily. Whether a law enforcement officer can do this is a matter of state law. Not every state has a "stop and identify" law, and the provisions of such laws vary from state to state. The SCOTUS has upheld the constitutionality of "stop and identify" laws in a general sense, but only in the context that a suspect has to identify him or herself when asked- not whether the suspect can be required to produce any particular form of positive ID.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_...ourt_of_Nevada

Legal permanent residents already carry such a card, including the fingerprint. So for us it's a non-starter.

I was born in Canada and had such a card for many years, but AFAIK legal permanent residents are not required to carry the card, nor are state and local law enforcement personnel allowed to ask one to produce it. (Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.) Mine lived in a desk drawer and only emerged when a potential employer asked for a photocopy to determine my legal status. No LEO ever asked me to see it. For that matter, no LEO ever asked me about my citizenship status, although I've never been arrested.

Again, however, this sidesteps the proverbial Elephant in the Room- natural-born U.S. citizens are not required to carry or even to have a specific form of ID establishing their citizenship. You may need your birth certificate and/or Social Security card for things like passports, driver's licenses, and pilot's certificates, but there is no requirement for anyone in particular to have any of these things (one doesn't have to drive a car, leave the country, or fly an airplane). What's more, the standards for obtaining the most common form of ID- a driver's license- vary from state to state, often only requiring a copy of a birth certificate in prior years, and no uniform system has ever existed to verify whether birth certificates are legit.

The Real I.D. Act tightened up a lot of the requirements but AFAIK purposefully didn't close every loophole for people with a pre-existing license, specifically so driver's licenses couldn't be characterized as a "back-door" national ID card.

[44 AMP]

natural-born U.S. citizens are not required to carry or even to have a specific form of ID establishing their citizenship.

I'm afraid that is no longer true, at least if you wish to legally work in this country. And the expired passport that was good enough proof last year isn't good enough this year. Only a current valid document will do.

After over 30 years of working directly for the US government or a government contractor, holding multiple security clearances over the years, with my fingerprints, photographs, and other personal info on file with several different govt agencies, I find it a bit insulting that I am being required (not asked, required) to prove, AGAIN that I am legally employable in the United States.

I feel this shows the BS about how Govt agencies communicate and share info. Apparently they have a hard time doing it for people who work for them, let alone the potential "malcontents". Hey, our tax dollars at work, eh?

[VeniVidiVici]

I don't get it. If you are a business who employees illegals your breaking the law , wouldn't you just break the law again and not ask them to provide I.D. like you have been doing all along? What does this solve?

[mapsjanhere]

Think Al Capone and the tax evasion charge, not having the right ID on file is easier to prove than knowingly employing illegals.

[alloy]

Aren't the possibilities of this card containing DNA being discussed?
I never thought I believed in popular tin-foil theory but lately I'm starting to wonder.
I got more valid ID than anyone should have to carry as it is.

[ADB]

I wouldn't worry about this. 25 states are on the record objecting to the requirements, and DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano is a prominent critic of the law. It would probably get tossed by the Supreme Court if it ever got implemented enough to trigger a lawsuit.

[tet4]

Lindsay Graham should be getting fired right about now for co-sponsoring such a thing. It's not going to fix the problem for the same reason that e-verify won't. The problem is one in which we have a border that's not protected and immigration policies that make it very hard for our neighbors to come and go legally. It's not fair or very brilliant to put another burden on our businesses, especially in a down economy.

If the federal government did what the constitution tells them to do, this would not be a problem. Why can't our reps in either party see this?

[BlueTrain]

Can you be more specific about that, please?

[tet4]

Sure. What part would you like me to clarify?

[andrewstorm]

i think you are slowly loosing ur rights here in the usa as are the states are loosing thier sovientry ,ur heading twoards a new world order,god save america.

[carguychris]

I'm afraid that is no longer true, at least if you wish to legally work in this country.

Yes, but (a) one does not necessarily have to work, and (b) if one does want to work, it's easy to find employers willing to keep one's legal status off the books.

One can be hired as temporary "day labor" with wages paid in cash, and the money spent on that person's wages can be rolled into some other item on the company's books. Otherwise-legit businesses can do an end run around the law by hiring subcontractors to perform certain tasks and adopting a "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding the labor the subcontractor brings in; current law and enforcement methods make it very difficult to punish a business that hires such a subcontractor.

[carguychris]

Sure. What part would you like me to clarify?

I can't speak for BlueTrain, but I'd like you to clarify this part.

If the federal government did what the constitution tells them to do...

...and what is that exactly? The Constitution tells the federal government to do lots of different things.

[CowTowner]

Looking at my 1970 issued SSN card, it must be a misprint when it is written "For Social Security and Tax Purposes - Not For Identification". I understand the new cards no longer contain that "misprint".

Mine has the same misprint on it.
And as a member of the U.S. Army in the late 70's, I had to grant the government permission to use my SSAN on my dog tags.
Something about the Privacy Act of 1974 if memory serves.