Ignoring objections from grassroots organizations from diverse communities throughout the state and a litany of lies to the legislature from the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), Gov. Gavin Newson signed a bill into law this week which authorizes the DMV to upload information about about all California driver’s licenses and state-issued non-driver ID cards to the SPEXS national ID database. The bill, SB-169, is effective immediately.

Gov. Newsom and the DMV have made much of the “guardrails” included in the bill. But as we testified at the last hearing before this bill was enacted (see video starting at 2:48:22) once the DMV uploads information about all California driver’s licenses and IDs to AAMVA (which holds the SPEXS database), the “guardrails” in this bill would do nothing to protect Californians against the threat that Federal or other states’ law enforcement agencies could obtain an order (1) requiring AAMVA to hand over this data in bulk and (2) prohibiting AAMVA from disclosing that order to the DMV or to the Californians — especially vulnerable immigrant and transgender Californians — against whom this data will be weaponized. Neither the DMV nor impacted Californians will even know this has happened, and it won’t be detectable by the audit of DMV records (not AAMVA records) required by SB-169.

In its report on the signing of SB-169, the Sacramento Bee erroneously states (perhaps based on misinformation from the DMV and/or the Governor’s office) that the data sharing authorized by SB-169 is “required by federal law.” But the regulations cited by the Bee apply only to those states that choose to comply with the REAL-ID Act.

As a coalition of 170 organizations said in a joint statement quoted by the Bee:

The first rule of combating tyranny is do not comply in advance. It is imperative that California not willingly give away data that the federal government could turn around and use to harm our communities.

No state is required to comply with the REAL-ID Act. No state is required to upload data about its residents to a database held by a private company, AAMVA.

This is a choice — the wrong choice — for Californians.

California DMV Director Steve Gordon responds to questions from members of Senate Budget Subcommittee #5 on Transportation, March 19, 2026

As part of their lobbying of the California legislature to change state law and appropriate $55 million to upload information about all California driver’s licenses and ID state-issued non-driver ID cards to the privately-held SPEXS national ID database, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and the office of Governor Gavin Newsom have claimed that the state is already “committed” to the planned upload, despite the fact that it would violate current state law restricting disclosure of license and ID records.

The latest responses to our public records requests show that this claim is false.

At a hearing on March 19, 2026, before Senate Budget Subcommittee $5 on Transportation, DMV Director Steve Gordon  testified (see video beginning at 1:42:00):

As I mentioned, you know, California has signed an agreement back in 2028 to effectuate, you know, the REAL ID Act and make sure that in fact, that we’re compliant, including State-to-State. So the agreement we have with the Department of Homeland Security, as well as the Transportation Security Administration, is we have a agreed upon date, which is the February [2027] date that you mentioned.

If the DMV Director, the Governor, or some other state official signed such an agreement purporting to commit the state to take actions prohibited by current state law, that raises important questions as to whether they violated their duty to comply with state laws, or whether they took it upon themselves to commit the legislature to change those laws.

After subsequent meetings in which the DMV and the Governor’s office doubled down on their claim that the state is already bound by signed “agreements” with the DHS and TSA, we filed public records requests with the DMV and the Governor’s office to find out who signed those agreements, when, and what the agreements say.

The response from the DMV and the Governor’s office was that they could find no record of any such agreements.

In our public records request, we cited DMV Director Gordon’s testimony and asked for:

…a copy of each agreement referred to by Director Gordon in this testimony, including the names, titles, and organizational or agency affiliations of each of the persons signing the agreement…. This request includes… the agreement(s) signed in 2018 and the agreement(s) that the state of California and/or the DMV currently has with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and/or Transportation Security Administration regarding the “State-To-State” system, the date of participation by the state of California and/or the DMV in that system, or the February 2027 date referred to by Director
Gordon.

The Office of the Governor told us that it “has no records responsive to your request.” The DMV, after three weeks of delay, told us that it could find no contracts or agreements at all with the TSA, and that the only contracts or agreements with the DHS that it could find were a series of annual contracts for the DMV to pay the DHS per-query fees to use the DHS/USCIS Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system to check the citizenship and immigration status of applicants for California driver’s licenses and IDs. The DMV could find no contracts or agreements with the DHS related to the “State-to-State” system.

Assuming these responses to our request for public records to be accurate, there is no agreement form 2018 or more recently with the DHS or TSA committing California to participate in the S2S network or upload any information to the SPEXS database at AAMVA’s central site for S2S, much less any agreement committing the state ot a February 2027 “deadline” for this upload — contrary to DMV Director Gordon’s testimony.

This isn’t a new question or the first time that DMV Director Gordon appears to have lied about REAL-ID Act requirements. In our testimony as the only public witness at a state budget hearing in 2019, we pointed out (see video beginning at 1:10:23) that that the DMV was already making plans that would require this upload, but hadn’t sought funding or authorization from the legislature for it. We also raised many of the other issues that have re-emerged this year when the DMV belatedly sought approval and funding for the upload.

Following that 2019 hearing, DMV Director Gordon admitted to us that he had personally flown without ID and knew that no ID at all is required to fly, despite his personal appearances in DMV videos and “public service announcements” claiming that ID was required and that REAL-ID would be required to fly.

Neither California legislators nor the public should trust the DMV on this issue, especially when the DMV’s Director makes specific claims in official testimony — naming specific parties, dates, and details — of which the DMV can find no record.

As we said at this Monday’s hearing before the full Senate Budget Committee (see video starting at 2:48:22) once the DMV uploads information about all California driver’s licenses and IDs to AAMVA (which holds the SPEXS database), the “guardrails” in this bill would do nothing to protect Californians against the threat that Federal or other states’ law enforcement agencies could obtain an order (1) requiring AAMVA to hand over this data in bulk and (2) prohibiting AAMVA from disclosing that order to the DMV or to the Californians — especially vulnerable immigrant and transgender Californians — against whom this data will be weaponized.

This is a major policy question that shouldn’t be be bundled into the budget. There’s no urgency and no legal deadline — only a date picked by AAMVA for AAMVA’s convenience. There’s no reason not to remove this proposal form this year’s budget and budget trailer bill so that  it can be given full and deliberate consideration by the appropriate policy committees of the legislature.

There’s an alternative: As we’ve been telling the DMV and the legislature for years, instread of premature capitulation to DHS threats, California should be  working through its Attorney General to prepare to defend Californians against any attempt by the DHS and/or TSA to carry out their lawless threats to interfere with state residents’ right to travel if the state chooses not to comply with the REAL-ID Act.

Withdrawing its opposition under behind-the-scenes pressure from Gov. Gavin Newsom and lawless threats from the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the California legislature has agreed to fund and revise state law to authorize the upload of information about all driver’s licenses and ID cards issued by the state to the private SPEXS national ID database operated by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA).

The budget compromise between Gov. Newsom and the legislature announced last night includes “guardrails” intended to give an illusion of protection for license and ID data.

There’s no time before the hearing on the budget compromise scheduled for Monday morning in the Senate Budget Committee for legislators to assess whether those guardrails will be effective. But to anyone aware of the real threat, it’s apparent that they are a sham.

That was inevitable, as we’ve pointed out in our previous statements to the legislature.

Once this data is transferred to AAMVA, components of the DHS or other Federal or state law enforcement agencies will be able to obtain it from AAMVA by court order. Such a subpoena or warrant could, and probably would, include a gag order prohibiting AAMVA from disclosing it to the state of California or to the individuals whose data is disclosed.

Even after the fact, neither California nor individual Californians will know that this has happened or be able to challenge it.

That data could be misused in many ways, but it’s especially likely be weaponized against  immigrant and transgende Californians who are already being targeted by Federal agencies and other states.

The summary of the proposed transportation budget trailer bill (AB 169) released last night says that it “Limits data sharing to only that required by federal law.” But that’s not true. “Compliance” with the REAL-ID by California or any other state is optional, not required. Neither the Federal REAL-ID Act nor any other Federal law requires, or could require, California or any other state to share any data with AAMVA, a private nonprofit corporation.

As we pointed out in our earlier testimony on the budget proposal,  California has a choice. The state could and should say “No” to premature capitulation to DHS threats.

The Legislature should reject this “compromise” sell-out. Instead, the state, through its Attorney General, could and should prepare to defend Californians against any interference by the DHS or Transportation Security Administration (TSA) with our right to travel.

Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs has vetoed  a bill which would have ended the state’s compliance with the Federal REAL-ID Act.

Like many other states, Arizona gives applicants for driver’s licenses or non-driver IDs two options: a “travel ID” that is issued in accordance with procedures that satisfy the requirements of the REAL-ID Act, or a non-compliant “non-travel” license or ID that is valid for driving or other state purposes but isn’t valid for Federal purposes.

HB2957 would have required the Arizona Department of Transportation to continue to offer this option of driver’s license and IDs that don’t comply with the REAL-ID Act. HB2957 would have added the requirement that information about these noncompliant licenses and IDs and the Arizona residents who choose them not be shared with other states and not be “stored in any interstate, federal or international database system, including the state pointer exchange services” (SPEXS), the national ID database hosted by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA).

Since 2024, Arizona has been sharing the contents of its database of both “travel” and “non-travel” licenses and IDs with other states, and has uploaded excerpts from each  license of either type — compliant or noncompliant — to the SPEXS national ID database.

The point of HB2957 is to end this practice. People who choose a non-compliant license or ID think they have opted out of the national data sharing and national ID database that is the goal of the REAL-ID Act. To make that opt out real, HB2957 would have required Arizona to discontinue uploads of data about noncompliant “non-travel” Arizona licenses and IDs to SPEXS.

But AAMVA requires a state that wants to participate in SPEXS  to upload data about all licenses and IDS the state has issued, regardless of whether they are issued in accordance with REAL-ID Act procedures.

Even if AAMVA — a private nonprofit corporation not subject to any of the decision-making rules applicable to state or Federal government agencies —  decided to change its rules, allowing state residents to opt out of national sharing of their license data would render all licenses issued by that state noncompliant with the REAL-ID Act.

The REAL-ID Act requires that, “To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall… Provide electronic access to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State [and] maintain a State motor vehicle database that contains, at a minimum… all data fields printed on drivers’ licenses and identification cards issued by the State.”

If a state withholds data about some licenses and IDs from this data sharing, that state won’t be in compliance with the REAL-ID Act. And for a license or ID to be “compliant”, it must both be (1) issued in accordance with compliant [procedures and (2) issued by a compliant sate. If the state as a whole is noncompliant, none of the licenses or IDs it issues will be compliant, regardless of what issuance procedures are followed.

HB2957 was approved by both chambers of the Arizona legislature by substantial majorities, but not by the 2/3 vote required to override a veto.

Gov. Hobbs’ veto letter says only that the bill “fails to strengthen required federal identification-verification safeguards that keep our state safe.” There’s no indication of how Gov. Hobbs thinks a private national ID database keeps anyone safe.

Gov. Hobbs is a Democrat, and the majority of members of both chambers of the Arizona legislature  are Republicans. This isn’t a partisan issue, though. Next door to Arizona, in California, a Democratic-majority legislature is fighting the Democratic governor to keep Californians’ data out of the SPEXS database.

HB2957 is likely to be reintroduced in the Arizona legislature next year.

The California Senate and Assembly have removed funding and legislative changes to upload drivers license data to the private SPEXS national ID database from Governor Gavin Newsom’s proposed budget.

This isn’t the final decision. The legislature has to pass its version of a budget by June 15th, but the final budget and associated legislative changes may not be enacted until sometime in August, after negotiations between the legislature and the Governor’s office. But as Khari Johnson and Wendy Fry explain in this article for CalMatters, even this brief postponement of approval will make it difficult of impossible for the California DMV to meet its self-imposed goal (not a legal deadline) of being ready for the upload by February 2027.

Some state legislators are still trying to find ways to put “guardrails” on California license and ID data that will protect it even after it is uploaded to  the national database. But the more carefully they study the problem, the more they realize that nothing the state could do would prevent this data from being obtained by Federal or out-of-state law enforcement agencies, without the knowledge of the DMV or the Californians against whom it could be weaponized, once it is uploaded to AAMVA, an out-of-state nongovernmental entity.

This is too important a decision to bury in the budget as an afterthought.

There’s no rush. The DMV’s target date for the upload was set by AAMVA, for its convenience, not by Federal or state law. Removing this from the budget and abandoning postponing any approval until next year (if this ill-considered plan by the DMV and the Governor isn’t abandoned), will give time to consider the implications and the alternatives.

Instead of preemptively capitulating to legally dubious Federal threats to harass California air travelers if the state doesn’t comply with the REAL-ID Act, the Governor should call the Feds bluff, stand up to the DHS, task the state’s Attorney General with preparing to defend Californians against any interference with our right to travel.

The budget committees of the California legislature are continuing to consider a proposal from Governor Newsom and the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to appropriate $55 million and, more importantly, change California law to permit the DMV to upload information about all licensed California drivers to the SPEXS national ID database.

We’re in Sacramento this week, along with a statewide coalition of immigrant, LGBTQ, and other human rights groups, talking to legislators about what’s wrong with this proposal:

(download this 1-page summary)

“State-to-State Verification System (S2S) Project” – OPPOSE

• If California chooses to comply with the REAL-ID Act, the DMV will be required to make all data in DMV records about all California driver’s licenses available to all other states (and to the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, AAMVA). The REAL-ID Act provides that, “To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall… Provide electronic access to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State [and] maintain a State motor vehicle database that contains, at a minimum… all data fields printed on drivers’ licenses and identification cards issued by the State.”
• DMV data will be available to other states through the S2S network. It will also be uploaded to the SPEXS national ID database at AAMVA’s central site.
• Other states can make only limited queries through the S2S network. But AAMVA as the holder of the SPEXS database can query and retrieve data in bulk at its central site.
• If the DMV doesn’t have a Social Security Number on file for a license, it will upload a record for that license to the SPEXS database with “99999” in the field for SSN.
• AAMVA could search for and retrieve all records with “99999” in the field for SSN, or could be ordered to do so by a Federal or state warrant, subpoena, or other court order.
• A demand to AAMVA for SPEXS data could and probably would include a gag order prohibiting AAMVA from telling the California DMV or the affected individuals that AAMVA had been required to retrieve and disclose their information.
• No provision in a contract between the DMV and AAMVA could override a gag order. California might not know about or be able to challenge a court order to AAMVA.
• Contractual “guardrails” would give only false and misleading reassurance, not real protection. The only way to prevent Federal agencies or other states from (secretly) obtaining data from AAMVA is for California not to upload that data to AAMVA.
• AAMVA is a private Virginia corporation not subject to any of the public records, open meetings, or privacy laws that would apply to a Federal or state government agency.
• AAMVA has no procedure for an individual to find out what information about them is in the SPEXS database or with whom AAMVA has shared any or all of that data.
• The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has threatened to interfere with Californians’ right to travel if California doesn’t choose to comply with the REAL-ID Act. But the promises made to California drivers and the protection of Californians’ personal information should take precedence over the convenience of air travelers who don’t want to get a passport or passport card.
• Instead of capitulating to unlawful or questionable DHS threats, California could and should challenge those threats, just as California has challenged other DHS threats.
• The “deadline” cited by the DMV was set by AAMVA, not by any law or regulation. There is no need to rush a decision which, once made, would be irrevocable.