Thread: Analysis: 'Real ID Act' scrutinized

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking ... -3715r.htm

Analysis: 'Real ID Act' scrutinized
By Al Swanson
United Press International
May 10, 2005

Immigration and civil liberties groups call the "Real ID Act" that would impose federal requirements on state-issued driver's licenses an attack on refugees and asylum-seekers, but supporters say it will make U.S. borders safer.

The House last week overwhelmingly passed the measure 368 to 58 as part a "must-pass" $82 billion Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill expected to be approved by the Senate this week.

President George W. Bush supports the legislation, which includes nearly $76 million for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and funds for anti-terrorism and tsunami relief.

Such a package is difficult for Congress members to vote against.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., R-Wis., the House sponsor, says the "Real ID Act" which requires states to verify four documents before issuing a driver's license, would strengthen border security.

The American Civil Liberties Union and other groups contend the bill is about more than IDs that are difficult to fake. They call the act a crackdown on immigration that rolls back asylum laws and a prelude to a national identification card.

States would have three years to enact changes requiring applicants for a driver's license to prove they are in the country lawfully to receive a license accepted as a form of federal identification.

A state could issue a second-tier license clearly marked not valid for federal identification purposes good for up to one year. Temporary driver's licenses issued to foreign visitors would expire when the visitor's visa expired with a maximum term of one year.

States would have to retain paper copies of identity documents for seven years and digital copies for 10 years.

"This sensible legislation is aimed at preventing another 9/11-type attack by disrupting terrorist travel and bolstering our border security," said Sensenbrenner. "Now more than ever, drivers' licenses can be accepted as identification for federal purposes, such as boarding a commercial airplane, entering a federal building or a nuclear power plant. Giving state drivers' licenses to anyone, regardless of whether they are here legally or illegally, is an open invitation for terrorists and criminals to exploit."

Supporters say all the federal law does is require states to vouch for the authenticity of the person presenting a driver's license: that they are who they claim to be. Backers say the law won't prevent all forgeries but it will make it harder to make and use phony IDs.

State officials aren't sold.

The heads of the National Governors Association, National Conference of State Legislatures, American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators and Council of State Governments opposed the act in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

"While governors, state legislatures, other state elected officials and motor vehicle administrators share your concern for increasing security and integrity of the driver's license and state identification processes, we firmly believe that the driver's license and ID card provisions of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 offer the best course for meeting those goals," the letter said.

Eleven states allow immigrants -- documented or undocumented -- to obtain driver's licenses.

The Washington Post said seven of the 9/11 hijackers got driver's licenses or ID cards in Virginia, which prior to 2001 did not require proof of legal presence in the United States before issuing a driver's license.

Critics contend the bill places an expensive unfunded mandate on states to check millions of documents, from birth certificates to Social Security cards, when people apply for a driver's license.

They say it increases the risk of identity theft by linking electronically machine-readable digital photographs and addresses on state Department of Motor Vehicle computers nationwide, would lead to more unlicensed, uninsured drivers on the road and impose harsh restrictions on immigrants seeking asylum from persecution.

Civil libertarians are exploring challenging the act in court because the federal legislation imposes costs on states without reimbursement. Some fear the measure shifts the burden of immigration enforcement to states.

"This is a dark day for those who count on the United States to provide safe refuge," said William Schulz, executive director of Amnesty International USA. "Asylum provisions in the 'Real ID Act' will do nothing to stop terrorists from entering the United States."

The Hispanic National Council of La Raza said the bill would make the United States less safe and undermine the fundamental American values of fairness, due process and protection for people fleeing oppression.

"There are legitimate and sound avenues for individuals to prove identity which would allow state Departments of Motor Vehicles to fulfill their mission of ensuring safe roads without creating new licensing requirements that would make the driver's license a de facto proof of legal residency in the United States," the group said on its Web site.

The American Civil Liberties Union expressed disappointment the act was pushed through without hearings or debate.

"The federalization of drivers' license and the culling of all information into massive databases, creates a system ripe for identity theft," the ACLU said.

The lawyer's group contends provisions of the act would force some people seeking asylum to produce written corroboration of persecution from those who persecuted them -- and in some cases eliminate the right of habeas corpus to seek a court review for the first time since the Civil War.

"Our asylum system has been running well in my opinion," Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association said on WAMU-FM's "Diane Rehm Show." "And yet what the 'Real ID Act' does is try to impose new standards on legitimate asylum-seekers that will make it harder for women fleeing forced abortion in China for example or a Coptic Christian fleeing persecution in Egypt for example."

Sensenbrenner says the bill would "weed out fraudulent asylum applications made by people lying through their teeth."

"There is no presumption of credibility," the bill states, "the inability to obtain corroborating evidence does not excuse the applicant from meeting the applicant's burden of proof."

Supporters said the law would speed completion of the closing of a 3-mile gap in the U.S.-Mexico border fence near San Diego.

Section 102 permits the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive all laws the secretary -- at his own discretion, and without judicial review -- determines would interfere with construction of barriers and roads along out national borders, according to the Washington-based Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the nation's oldest and largest civil and human rights coalition.

Wade Henderson, executive director of the conference, said the bill goes far beyond driver's licenses and would drive undocumented immigrants further underground, turn away legitimate asylum seekers, and let the secretary of Homeland Security "disregard almost any law on the books, even civil rights or labor protections."

Sensenbrenner said the act allows for judicial review of the secretary's actions "but only for constitutional claims such as takings of private property."

--

(Please send comments to nationaldesk@upi.com.)

Wade Henderson, executive director of the conference, said the bill goes far beyond driver's licenses and would drive undocumented immigrants further underground, turn away legitimate asylum seekers, and let the secretary of Homeland Security "disregard almost any law on the books, even civil rights or labor protections."

Hopefully it will help drive illegals out of the country.
Isn't it curious that Mr. Henderson's concern is with non-Americans?
Why aren't you concerned about Americans?