Papers, Please!

The Identity Project

Monthly Archives: May 2026

May 26 2026

Reasons for California not to comply with the REAL-ID Act

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.
May 22 2026

Minnesota OK’s “open” meetings behind TSA checkpoint

The Minnesota Commissioner of Administration  has issued a formal advisory opinion that it doesn’t violate the state’s open meeting law for the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) to hold its meetings in location behind a TSA checkpoint and accessible only by showing REAL-ID or paying a $45 fee, as long as the MAC offers to pay (or reimburse) the fee for those seeking to attend MAC meetings.

The advisory opinion addressed only the following question:

Does the Metropolitan Airports Commission Board of Commissioners policy requiring attendees to pay for TSA ConfirmID or obtain a Real ID or passport to attend meetings violate Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.01 to hold open meetings?

The advisory opinion only addresses the requirement to pay the fee or show REAL-ID. This leaves unresolved an issue on which we requested an opinion, but which the Commissioner declined to address: Whether Minnesota’s open meeting law permits the MAC or another state body to hold meetings in a location to which access is under the control and subject to the standardless discretion of the TSA or another third party. The TSA claims the right to deny passage to anyone, regardless of whether they show REAL-ID, pay the illegal $45 fee, or respond to the TSA’s unlawful questioning.

May 21 2026

Immigrant and human rights groups call for California not to upload driver’s license data to national ID database

Before a hearing last week before the California Assembly Budget Subcommittee #4 on Transportation, a coalition of 170 immigrant and human rights groups and allied organizations submitted a joint letter opposing the plan to upload data about all holders of California driver’s licenses and state-issued IDs to the SPEXS national ID database.

The joint letter and testimony by some of the witnesses at the hearing called on legislators to reject the proposal by Governor Newsom and the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to appropriate $55 million and amend California’s driver’s license privacy law to allow the upload, which would be prohibited by current state law.

Alliance San Diego and other groups have also launched a petition campaign for individuals to tell Governon Newsom, “Do Not Comply” with the REAL-ID Act.

In testimony and a Powerpoint presentation for the hearing, witnesses from the DMV led by Director Steve Gordon doubled down on claims also made by Governor Newsom’s office that are partly misleading and partly false.

The DMV witnesses stressed that other states accessing the SPEXS database at AAMVA’s central site through the  S2S network will be able to send and receive answers to only a limited set of queries, and won’t be able to perform bulk searches such as for all the SPEXS records from California with “99999” in place of a Social Security number.

But the DMV avoided mentioning that AAMVA, as the owner of the SPEXS database, could perform this or any other sort of bulk search and retrieval of SPEXS data — or could be ordered to do so by  Federal or state law enforcement agencies or courts.

The DMV also said in its Powerpoint and testimony that, “AAMVA must notify CA if non-participants [such as federal agencies] request data.” This isn’t true.

The contract with AAMVA signed by the DMV on March 30, 2026 provides that AAMVA will notfy the California DMV of such a demand “if legally permitted”. A legal order to AAMVA to search for, retrieve, and hand over some or all of the information in the SPEXS database could and probably would be accompanied by a gag order prohibiting AAMVA from disclosing the order to  California authorities, the individuals whose data was retrieved and revealed, or anyone else.

As we’ve noted before, California authorities cannot truthfully promise that AAMVA will be allowed to notify them of a demand for SPEXS data, or that they will even have an opportunity to contest such a demand. Once this data is uploaded to AAMVA — a private out-of-state entity — this data will be out of the state’s control.

Some witnesses at the hearing called for “guardrails” to be included in the California law to protect sensitive data uploaded to SPEXS, such as the “9999” placeholder that flags  records of drivers who were unable to provide the DMV with a Social Security number.

But in reality, no such guardrails are possible. Nothing in California law or a contract between AAMVA and the DMV could override AAMVA’s duty, as a private Virginia corporation, to comply with orders from Federal courts or courts in Virginia or other states.

“Guardrails” in the law authorizing the upload to SPEXS would be a sham: They would offer only a misleading and falsely reassuring illusion of protection for Californians’ privacy

Senate Budget Subcommittee Chair Steve Bennett (D-Ventura) acknowledged explicitly that whether to capitulate to Federal threats to harass Californians boarding airline flights, if the state doesn’t comply with the REAL-ID Act, presents a choice between “inconvenience” to air travelers and much more severe potential negative consequences for immigrants  or others who might be targeted based on SPEXS data.

That should be any easy choice. Protection of vulnerable Californians, especially immigrants, against Federal weaponization of their personal information should take precedence over the convenience of air travelers. California should not comply with the REAL-ID Act. Instead, the state should stand up to lawless Federal threats and prepare to defend Californians against any interference with their right to travel.

The DMV witnesses at last week’s hearing weren’t asked, and didn’t explain, why they signed a contract with AAMVA to upload data to an out-of-state private entity in a manner prohibited by current California law, without waiting to see whether the legislature would amend the law to permit this upload.

The DMV also avoided mentioning that the February 2027 “deadline” for the upload of California data to SPEXS was set solely by AAMVA and isn’t based on any provision of Federal law or regulations. There’s no need for California to do anything this year, especially on a rushed schedule that buries this major policy change in the budget bill.

The Assembly Budget Subcommittee heard testimony but deferred any decision on the proposal The next hearing on this proposal come as soon as next Thursday, May 28, in Senate Budget Subcommittee 5 on Transportation.