The Real ID Act gives the DHS unprecedented power by allowing the Secretary of DHS to solely determine for what "Official Purposes" citizens must present a Real ID materially compliant driver's license.
While there are three such official purposes today Download DHS Real ID Act of 2005 Final Rules Part 1 and 2 Document bottom of page 13 and top of page 14) the fact is this provision of the Real ID Act 2005 would allow for the Secretary of DHS to add to the current official purposes without consulting with or having the approval of Congress.
It is our position that too much focus is being placed on the Real ID compliant licenses itself and not enough on the standard for the digital facial image collection required in the rules of the Real ID Act.
While this is true that some states are standing by the laws or resolutions passed in those states that prohibit participating in or complying with the Real ID Act, the fact is even in these states DMV's are continuing to meet the first 18 benchmarks of the Real ID Act to be considered in material compliance.
The state DMV's that are continuing to meet the benchmarks even though there is a state law or resolution against participation or compliance with Real ID are doing so under the premise that they are complying with the best practices of AAMVA, not the provisions of the Real ID Act.
It is true that AAMVA said they opposed the Real ID Act but it was not because they thought the Real ID Act went too far but rather most likely because it was not strong enough in some areas.
We should ask ourselves if AAMVA opposed the Real ID Act 2005 why didn't AAMVA object to being named the "Hub" and "Backbone" of the Real ID Act? The words hub and backbone come directly from the Final Rules of the Real ID Act issued by DHS in 2008.
https://americarestored.us/RealID
While there are three such official purposes today Download DHS Real ID Act of 2005 Final Rules Part 1 and 2 Document bottom of page 13 and top of page 14) the fact is this provision of the Real ID Act 2005 would allow for the Secretary of DHS to add to the current official purposes without consulting with or having the approval of Congress.
It is our position that too much focus is being placed on the Real ID compliant licenses itself and not enough on the standard for the digital facial image collection required in the rules of the Real ID Act.
While this is true that some states are standing by the laws or resolutions passed in those states that prohibit participating in or complying with the Real ID Act, the fact is even in these states DMV's are continuing to meet the first 18 benchmarks of the Real ID Act to be considered in material compliance.
The state DMV's that are continuing to meet the benchmarks even though there is a state law or resolution against participation or compliance with Real ID are doing so under the premise that they are complying with the best practices of AAMVA, not the provisions of the Real ID Act.
It is true that AAMVA said they opposed the Real ID Act but it was not because they thought the Real ID Act went too far but rather most likely because it was not strong enough in some areas.
We should ask ourselves if AAMVA opposed the Real ID Act 2005 why didn't AAMVA object to being named the "Hub" and "Backbone" of the Real ID Act? The words hub and backbone come directly from the Final Rules of the Real ID Act issued by DHS in 2008.
https://americarestored.us/RealID
No comments:
Post a Comment