Join me today, in person or virtually, at the MIT Public Forums on the REAL ID Act of 2005.
-
A Personal Blog
by Michael Froomkin
Laurie Silvers & Mitchell Rubenstein Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Miami School of Law
My Publications | e-mail
-
Overcast
71°F
-
Sat

76/56
-
Sun

70/54
-
Mon

72/63
-
Overcast
71°F
-
Who Reads Discourse.net?
Readers describe themselves.
Please join in.
Unique Homepage Views:
Sitemeter count:
Feed 1
Feed 2
Recent Comments
- Just me: Is it really a private transaction when states like our own fair Florida require you to have auto insurance?...
- Vic: I don’t understand what it wants me to DO? Bail out the REST of faltering America like we did Chrysler?...
- Michael Froomkin: AFAIK, all the ones around here are fixed, well-signed, and thus to some extent avoidable; the...
- i-celebes: Great Commercials…!!!
- Just me: We already use them right here in S.Fla. The 878 and 874 have recently installed toll booths with no cash...

Why don’t they just go the whole hog and pass an act banning ‘evil’?
The premise of the government speakers is that because the act has been passed and takes effect May 2008 (an election year!) that it is inevitable. They don’t seem to be taking much notice of the limited sanctions available to force states into compliance. The only sanction available is to refuse to accept IDs from dissenting states, a sanction that is so excessive as to be absurd.
The political context in which implementation is expected to take place is one where there is intense and sustained protest about the use of torture and imprisonment without trial by US authorities. A very significant proportion, approaching a majority of the country believes that the administration is guilty of war crimes.
Don’t states rights include the right to protect the individual from tyranny?
The actual substance of the act or regulations under the act are irrelevant. Implementation of the act requires trust and that does not exist.