home

SSN's and DL's

By TChris, Section Legislation
Posted on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:26:27 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

George Bush isn't the only public official who thinks he has the right to decide which laws he must follow and which he is free to ignore. Congress passed a law prohibiting states from placing social security numbers on driver's licenses, but Mississippi refuses to change.

Mississippi's driver services director, Maj. Joseph Rigby, cited a state law allowing the practice. "I believe there's a separation of state and federal government," he said. "Right now, we still have a state law on the books that I have to abide by."

Rigby apparently sees no need to seek a court's opinion of congressional power to enact the law; he'd rather disregard it. Other states are more attentive to the federal prohibition, which serves the worthy purpose of making identity theft more difficult.

At least three other states and the District of Columbia are still putting Social Security numbers on licenses but said they are reversing their policies after getting inquiries from the AP.

In Iowa, officials said they will mail new licenses and identification cards in the coming weeks to 3,770 residents who were issued cards with Social Security numbers after the federal law took effect. A department spokeswoman said federal officials never notified the state about the new requirement.

Nevada said it plans to drop the old practice in March. "We weren't aware of it," Department of Motor Vehicles spokesman Tom Jacobs said of the federal law. And Ohio's motor vehicle agency said it will pursue a change in state law to comply.

Most states are complying with regard to newly-issued or renewed licenses, but it may take years before a license bearing a social security number comes up for renewal. If you live in one of those states, take care not to misplace your license, or consider paying for your license to be reissued without your social security number.

< Feingold Floor Statement Today on NSA Surveillance Program | Sports Bet Bust >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    SSN's and DL's | 8 comments (8 topical)
    Re: SSN's and DL's (none / 0) (#1)
    by Punchy on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:41:53 PM EST
    Very basic law question--fed law ALWAYS trumps state law, right? So, how is MS allowed to do this? After all, 30-odd states have laws outlawing abortion, but after R v. W made it a federal issue, those laws must be, and are, ignored. Am I missing something, or do I foresee a trend where state and fed gov'ts just decide for themselves what laws they'd like to enforce and abide by? Isn't this known as chaos?

    Re: SSN's and DL's (none / 0) (#2)
    by rdandrea on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 03:26:13 PM EST
    I don't think the founding fathers intended for Federal law to always trump State law. The 10th Amendment says: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." In fact, I think there was a Civil War fought over whether Federal law trumped State law. Fortunately in some instances (e.g., slavery), and unfortunately in other instances (e.g., medical marijuana), Federal law seems to have taken control.

    Re: SSN's and DL's (none / 0) (#3)
    by swingvote on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 03:44:47 PM EST
    Don't know if they still do, but Virginia used to use your Social Security number as your driver's license number.

    Re: SSN's and DL's (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 03:50:52 PM EST
    justpaul, that's what Mississippi does too. It's been the policy for years that you could ask for your SSN not to be on there, but by default, it's been your drivers license number. At least that's how it was 2-3 years ago when I went to college there, but since they won't change for federal law, I doubt they've stopped doing that of their own accord.

    Re: SSN's and DL's (none / 0) (#5)
    by libdevil on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 04:21:57 PM EST
    I don't see Mississippi winning this one. There may be legitimate issues where you could argue states' rights, but the proper use of a federally issued ID number for a federally administered insurance plan and payment of federal taxes just doesn't seem to be one that the states are going to find much control over.

    Re: SSN's and DL's (none / 0) (#6)
    by Pete Guither on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 04:32:22 PM EST
    It definitely seems that the states have a much more legitimate position in claiming the right to follow their laws regarding medical practices for their citizens (medical marijuana and assisted suicide) than in the use of a federal ID number.

    Re: SSN's and DL's (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 04:41:51 PM EST
    rdandrea, Please read Article VI, the second paragraph: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." That pretty well takes care of the issue, I'd say.

    Re: SSN's and DL's (none / 0) (#8)
    by rdandrea on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 07:44:19 PM EST
    Mr. Bates -- respectfully: Although I am not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV, I would have to say that Article VI didn't take care of the issue--not at the time, and not for a long time after. At the time the Constitution was written, there was a great deal of disagreement about how much power should be vested in the Federal government. The Bill of Rights, 10 of the first 12 amendments proposed, was passed by the First Congress in 1791, part of a deal that was necessary to ensure that the Constitution was ratified in the first place. A compromise about Federal power was necessary then and it's been fought about a lot between then and now. The modern idea of Federal trumping State probably began with Gitlow vs. New York in 1925, when the Supreme Court decided that the 14th Amendment, by extension, made other provisions of the Bill of Rights applicable to the States. As far as how you or I or anybody else as individuals feel about centralizing power in the Federal government, it's pretty much always been a function of how you feel about who's running the Federal government. I'm not a big fan of the people currently in charge.

    SSN's and DL's | 8 comments (8 topical)