How ID Cards might be made de facto mandatory, but not de jure mandatory
Tim May
tcmay at got.net
Wed Sep 19 19:50:11 PDT 2001
On Wednesday, September 19, 2001, at 07:00 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
> I recall there being fairly high, if not supreme, court
> decisions in the past confirming that you never have to
> identify yourself to the police. Other than when driving a
> car, of course, as that's a "privilege" not a right. So how
> are they going to force these mandatory ID cards on people?
>
(When I say "will require" I mean that other legislation will require
that the libraries, companies, rental agencies, etc. inspect them. Those
who don't have them simply won't be able to rent cars, use libraries,
get driver's licenses, cash checks, etc.)
1. Libraries will require the card before giving access to public
terminals (or perhaps even to books...)
2. Hotels, airlines, car rental and storage locker companies will
require them.
3. States will require driver's licenses to be cross-linked with these
ID cards.
4. Gun purchases, ammunition purchases, hunting licenses, fishing
licenses, etc. cross-linked.
5. Use the banking system or money order/check-cashing systems in any
way. Including filing taxes.
...and so on.
It's unlikely that these ID cards will be demanded on the street
("Papers, please!"). But the cards can be mandated for nearly every
other aspect of economic life.
The Supreme Court will not have to even rule on these cross-linkings.
It should be fine for someone to _not_ have such an ID card, provided he
does not want to rent or buy a car, get a driver's license, buy
ammunition, check into a hotel, rent a mailbox, open a bank account,
cash a check, or file tax forms.
None of them are cases where the state, ostensibly, is requiring names
to be attached to writings or pamphlets. Nor are they cases where
internal movement requires a passport. (These are some of the reasons
past courts have thrown out mandatory identification laws.) Properly
done, a cop will never have to demand the ID card, so the issue of it
being mandatory becomes untested in courts (I'm speculating a bit
here...).
I'm not endorsing these moves, of course, just speculating on how the
courts may acquiesce to such an ID card.
And, of course, another 911-like event could make the Supreme Court
reverse itself.
--Tim May
More information about the Testlist
mailing list