Join me today, in person or virtually, at the MIT Public Forums on the REAL ID Act of 2005.
Recent Bluessky Posts- I think that was the Moderns, right? (As opposed to the Ancients, or the Middle-English....) August 18, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- I'm guessing this isn't aimed at law school faculty? It seems to assume undergraduate teaching.... August 18, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Still on 6. Nervously eyeing the coming end of security patches in October. August 18, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- How bad do things have to get before we decide the circumstances justify it? Are we not at an all-hands-on-deck moment already? August 17, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Still down. Now saying after 6pm. Phone hotspot is awful slow... August 17, 2026 Michael Froomkin
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.