Papers, Please!

The Identity Project

Category Archives: Papers, Please

Sep 07 2007

Ninth Circuit dismisses ID to enter courthouse case

The Foti v. McHugh case challenging the identification requirement to enter a courthouse was dismissed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last week in a startlingly dismissive manner. Despite the court’s appointment the law firm of Fenwick & West to act as pro bono counsel (IDP acting as co-counsel) for appellants after they had completed their own briefings pro se, the complete rebriefing of the case by all parties, and the oral argument last April, the court dismissed the case by means of an unpublished memorandum deficient of any meaningful legal analysis.

Appellant Foti was denied access to the Federal courthouse when he tried to enter it to represent himself when contesting a motion to dismiss in a case he had brought on a separate matter against the Federal government. Foti does not have ID and correctly states that no law requires him to get one – only that there are assorted punishments for not doing so. Foti was denied access to the court to argue on his behalf because he doesn’t own ID and his case was dismissed. Foti then brought another suit challenging the requirement to show ID to enter the courthouse which was then dismissed by the District Court and that dismissal is now affirmed by the Appellate Court.

The two-page memorandum simply states that Foti, and his friend Augustine who tried to accompany him and also owns no ID, “do not have a constitutional right to enter the federal building anonymously.” The court then cited two cases that did not support their statement.

Unfortunately, the question presented to the court was not whether anyone has a constitutional right to do anything anonymously, but rather whether the identification requirement itself is an impediment to the free exercise of appellants many important and protected constitutional rights exercised in the courthouse. This was brooked absolutely no analysis. By dismissing this case in such an off-hand manner the court is desperately trying to screw back on the lid of something they wish they had never opened. However, in doing so, they have screwed the lid on crooked and this matter will not remain contained.

Stay tuned.

Sep 06 2007

Identity Project responds to proposals for restrictions on travel

Continuing our work to expose governments’ efforts to control our movements through checkpoints, government records of where we go and what we do, government-issued credentials and travel documents, and other schemes to require, “Your papers, please!”, the Identity Project has filed formal
comments recently with the Department of Fatherland Security on its latest schemes
to monitor and control our travels:

  • Comments of the Identity Project on proposed exemptions from the Privacy Act for secret derogatory information from airlines and travel companes stored in personal travel histories (along with records of activities protected by the First Amendment) and used against would-be travelers as part of the “Automated Targeting System”: comments, background
  • Comments of the Identity Project on proposed requirements for passports or other government-issued credentials for all travel across U.S. borders, including land travel to and from Canada and travel by U.S. citizens seeking to leave, or return to, the U.S., as part of the “Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative”: comments, background
Aug 12 2007

DHS proposes to require both ID papers and passes for all air travel

In a series of recent publications in the Federal Register, the Department of Homeland Security is proposing a comprehensive new system of surveillance and, perhaps more important, control of both domestic and international travelers.

The proposed new rules, which are currently open for public comments, would require that:

  1. All would-be international travellers to or from the USA (even US citizens crossing the U.S.-Canada border on foot) would have to have government-issued ID credentials
  2. All would-be passengers on international or domestic flights to, from, over, via, or within the U.S. would have to have both government-issued ID credentials and explicit case-by-case prior permission from the DHS to the airline to allow each passenger to board a plane.

The proposed rules would enforce the requirements for papers and permits through default provisions that would:

  1. Require all air travellers to show their papers (“government-issued photo ID”) to airline staff on request of the DHS, under penalty of denial of transportation.
  2. Forbid any airline from issuing a boarding pass to anyone, or allowing them to baord a plane, unless and until the airline received individual permission (a “cleared message”) authorizing that airline to allow that specific person on that specific flight.

The “Notices of Proposed Rulemaking” (NPRM) and Privacy (invasion) Act “System of Records Notices (SORNs) dismiss the right ot travel out of hand, and ignore provisions of international law, the Bill of Rights, and Federal law recognizing a right to free domestic and international movement and a “public right of transit” by air, requiring airlines to operate as “common carriers” and transport all passengers paying the fare in their published tariff, and requiring the DHS itself to condider these rights in its rulemaking.

If you haven’t gotten the proper papers, you won’t be allowed even to leave the country, much less to return home. If the government doesn’t choose to give the airline permission for any particular trip you want to take, you won’t be allowed to get on a plane. And any time any airline employee or agent says, “Papers, please!”, you’ll have to produce them for their private inspection, copying, and use for whatever purposes they want.
Among other problems, this amounts to a general order subjecting travelers to private searches, and allowing the private searchers to use any information obtained from those searches for their own commercial or other purposes. Since it is impossible to tell who is, and who is not, actually authorized to act on behalf of the government or to whom an airline has delegated its work, the proposed rules would effectively subject travelers to compulsory search by anyone in any airport claiming (unverifiably) to be an agent of an airline.

Jun 29 2007

Former Congressman Bob Barr opposes Real ID

Bob Barr is a former conservative hate-monger who somehow found his moral compass. He is now preaching tolerance of gays in the military, ending the drug war, repealing Real National ID, and most recently taking the Real National ID requirement out of the immigration bill. He is the first politician who straightforwardly says, “no America citizen should have to prove to a government entity who they are in order to obtain or retain employment.” We couldn’t have said it better ourselves.

The thread that runs through all these issues is honoring the rights of individuals to make their own choices without being tracked or coerced by the nanny state. Welcome to your sanity, Bob; we hope you keep it a long time.

Jun 26 2007

Today is Your Day to Stop Real ID

We have less than 48 hours to stop our nation from having a National ID card scheme.

The US Senate is scheduled to vote either today or tomorrow on two amendments that will remove Real ID provisions from the immigration bill.

Real ID is a very, very real national identification card. Sixteen states have passed legislation rejecting REAL ID: now it’s time for the Senate to do their part.

You can fax your Senators and take immediate action by visiting:

http://unrealid.com/action.html

Jun 06 2007

Ask your Senator TODAY to keep Real ID out of Immigration bill

As mentioned in the last article, the Feds are trying to ratchet up the punishment for states which refuse to implement the Real National ID that they slipped into a bill last year. Their latest trick is to declare that if you are a citizen of a state that rejects Real National ID, you won’t be able to legally hold a job. (Of course, preventing innocents from supporting themselves is unconstitutional, violating a fundamental freedom that existed before the Constitution, but don’t expect the quisling courts to save you.) Montana’s legislature decisively rejected Real National ID, and its two senators have offered Senate Amendment 1236 to the pending Senate immigration bill, S. 1348. The amendment would strip out all the Real National ID provisions from the immigration bill. This will be voted up or down on the Senate floor on Thursday, June 7, 2007.

Please call both of your Senators and ask them to vote FOR this amendment 1236 that removes Real ID from the immigration bill. Real ID — National ID — is a terrible, dangerous idea, and the Senate should repeal it rather than penalizing citizens of states that choose not to participate.

The objectionable provision is hidden on page 222-223 of this 790-page bill. It’s in Section 274A. Section (a)(1)(B) makes it unlawful “to hire, or to recruit or refer for a fee, for employment in the United States an individual unless such employer meets the requirements of subsections (c) and (d).” Subsection (c), “Document verification requirements”, requires “the employer shall attest, under penalty of perjury and on a form prescribed by the Secretary, that the employer has verified the identity and eligibility for employment of the individual by examining a document described in sub-paragraph (B).” (c)(1)(B) defines “Identification documents”: “(i) in the case of an individual who is a national of the United States– (I) a United States passport; or (II) a driver’s license or identity card issued by a State, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or an outlying possession of the United States that satisfies the requirements of division B of Public Law 109-13 (119 Stat. 302).” Division B of PL 109-13 is the Real ID Act. Put that all together — if an employer doesn’t see your Real ID driver’s license (or a passport), it’s unlawful for them to hire you.

Jun 05 2007

Real National ID is dead; get a clue

Stateline.org has noticed the Real ID controversy, but hasn’t figured out what’s going on. They keep reporting blather about how “citizens of states that are not compliant would be unhappy when they realize they can’t use their driver’s licenses to board flights“. They haven’t figured out yet that no federal statute can disenfranchise every citizen of Nevada, Washington, Montana, and New Hampshire from their fundamental rights. The federal government cannot constitutionally pass a law that prohibits Montanans from flying to Texas — or that prevents them from entering a federal courthouse to witness a public trial.

The states are no longer in post-9/11 mania; they are showing sense. The Feds are still trying to milk the mania long past the public’s former tolerance, as if they can’t quite believe the years of carte blanche are over. As usual when someone questions its authority, the Federal response is to ratchet up the punishment. Now there’s a bill in the Senate claiming that no citizen of those four states will be able to legally hold a job! The Feds might as well straightforwardly declare them “unpersons” and order that they be shot on sight. Their fellow unperson employers will just ignore that federal pronouncement, too.

And the excuse for this shoddy regimentation? There’s a secret blacklist of people who the US Government believes are so innocent that they can’t be arrested, nor put on the “Most Wanted” list — but so dangerous they can’t be given the same rights as everybody else, and can’t challenge their dalit status in a court. Can you say “claptrap”? I knew you could. So, the reason all 300 million citizens of the US need to get their Real National ID card is so the Feds will know that anybody who has such a card isn’t one of these few thousand dangerous people on the no-fly blacklist. That’s the reason. Ask DHS if you don’t believe me.

There’s a word for when a government is totally concerned with whether the paperwork about you was properly filed in their database, and totally unconcerned with whether you are an innocent person just trying to exercise the basic rights of your life, like freedom of movement, observing the workings of government, the right to work, and liberty of contract. I’ll let you recall it yourself.