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
All opinions on this blog are those of the author(s) and not their employer(s) unelss otherwise specified.
Who Reads Discourse.net?
Readers describe themselves.
Please join in.Reader Map
Recent Comments
- Michael on I Know Who Won’t Be A Vice Presidential Candidate
- Dan Riley on I Know Who Won’t Be A Vice Presidential Candidate
- Eric on Real or Onion?
- Just me on Real or Onion?
- Eric on Real or Onion?
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 48 other subscribers
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.