Manage updates with the Download App
(continued from previous page)
Real ID vs. the states
TalkBack
E-mail
del.icio.us
Digg this(continued from previous page)
Real ID could be the latest skirmish in years of legal battles between states and the federal government over religious freedom laws. Until 1990, U.S. law said that the government has to show a "compelling interest" in order to succeed in limiting a person's free exercise of religion, as evidenced in the Quaring case. But then came a U.S. Supreme Court case called Employment Division v. Smith, which concluded that if a rule is neutral and isn't designed to target a particular religion, then it may pass constitutional muster.
In a response to critics of that decision, Congress enacted a law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which attempted to shift more of the burden back to the government in winning such cases. It said: "Government shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion" except in limited circumstances. That law, however, was partially gutted by the Supreme Court, which ruled Congress had overstepped its boundaries by applying that rule to the states, prompting many states to enact their own versions of the law.
What's relevant to the new Real ID rules, however, is that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act does still appear to apply to federal laws and rules, said the ACLU's Mach. If the ACLU does challenge Real ID, it plans to make its case using that law.
Whether such a challenge would be successful is another question.
Because Homeland Security appears to have a fairly narrow requirement--that is, that a driver's license applicant's face be uncovered--the government would likely be able to argue that it's pursuing its security-related goals in the narrowest possible way, said Seval Yildirim, director of the Center for International and Comparative Law at Whittier Law School in California.
"In other words, this is not an outright prohibition on all religious clothing or covering, but only those that prevent the state from identifying the individual," said Yildirim, who is defending a Muslim police officer in Philadelphia who was prohibited from wearing her head scarf while in uniform and on the job.
A few years ago, the ACLU of Florida
Even though only some Muslims could be affected by the Real ID rules, it's a "significant minority," said Ibrahim Ramey, director of the human and civil rights division of the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation. Ramey estimated that about 80 percent of Muslim women wear headscarves and about 10 percent also don a niqab, or face veil.
Organizations like his would "certainly be willing" to sign onto legal action with other civil liberties groups against the rules, Ramey said. (The Muslim American Society also has broader concerns about Real ID's implications for undocumented immigrants.)
"I would argue again that the benefit of religious accommodation far outweighs what some people might perceive as the drawback or the problematic nature of doing it," Ramey said in a telephone interview. "I don't think it's something...that will involve anything close to a large plurality of Muslim women, but for any woman that chooses to wear the covering, it ought to be something that's respected and accommodated by the larger society, particularly if there's no evidence of criminal intent."
CNET News.com's Declan McCullagh contributed to this report.
What is Real ID?
Federal regulations creating a uniform national ID card--called Real ID--take effect on May 11. If your state hasn't agreed in principle to upgrade its driver's licenses to be Real ID-compliant, you could have trouble traveling by air and taking advantage of some government services.
A CNET News.com survey shows that just over half of the states have signed up, while some have flatly refused to participate, typically citing costs or sovereignty worries. Privacy is another concern, with a mandatory barcode on Real ID cards lacking encryption or legal prohibitions against misuse, and mandatory linking of states' motor vehicle databases.
Stories in this series
Monday: Real ID could mean real travel headaches
In just over four months, millions of law-abiding Americans could face new
hassles when traveling on commercial flights if they hold driver's licenses or
ID cards issued by states that haven't agreed to comply with Real ID. Homeland
Security is already predicting "delays" and "enhanced security screening"
procedures for those Americans in the non-Real ID line at the airport.
Tuesday: Federal buildings become Real ID zones
Everyone from visitors to the U.S. Capitol building to
jurors being called to duty in federal courthouses could be affected by Real
ID's requirement that noncompliant driver's licenses may not be used to access
"federal facilities." Homeland Security says it "cannot predict" how many
Americans in non-Real ID states will be inconvenienced.
Wednesday: Religious minorities face Real ID crackdown
Some U.S. states have long allowed citizens with religious objections to avoid
having their photograph on driver's licenses. The Amish, Old Order Mennonites,
and some Muslim women fall into this category. But licenses without photographs
don't comply with Real ID, a rule that could invite a legal challenge.
Thursday: FAQ: How will Real ID affect you?
What are the privacy implications? What happens next? This list of frequently asked questions tries to clear up
some of the confusion surrounding the controversial law.
Previous coverage
DHS: Real ID could help shut down meth labs
Chertoff: Real ID will 'strengthen' Americans' privacy
National ID plan may have killed immigration bill
Senate takes step away from Real ID
Congress rethinks the Real ID Act
Homeland Security offers details on Real ID
FAQ: How Real ID will affect you
Related coverage
U.K. ditches ID card megadatabase
Tech industry attacks state anti-RFID laws
Britain to use ID card database as national register
New RFID travel cards could pose privacy threat
Feds: More data sharing by terrorist screeners
Passports to get RFID chip implants
Credits
Editors: Michelle Meyers, Desiree Everts
Design: Shaun Charity
Production: Daniel Judd
Survey: Anne Broache
The Federal Reserve is using our own government against us to enslave us, to know where we're going and what we're doing every minute of the day and night. That's the bottom line.
To fight back is simple. Stop paying your credit cards. Don't mess with the IRS--that gestapo unit can put you in jail. But the penalty for not paying your credit cards is one, a poor credit rating, and two, possible garnishment of your wages. However, according to my sources within the banking industry, garnishment never happens. Why? Because it costs the banks a pretty penny each and every month to serve the papers to your employer. And if you quit your job because of the garnishment, it's going to cost them even more to track you down at your new one.
This is the ultimate loophole, and one we can exploit until such time as Congress, under pressure from the Federal Reserve, passes a new law against doing so. Then we'll know beyond a shadow of a doubt where the loyalties of Congress lay. The revolution will gain all sorts of support because it will be clear to everyone from all walks of life that we the People must unite and even shed some blood to take our country back. But are we any less than our Forefathers? I think not.
M.L. Bushman
I was going to type something more detailed but I think this gets a better message across. I would also like to add that there is no point resisting real id. It's going to happen. If you are adamantely opposed to something then it's as simple as don't do it. Sure you won't be able to get on planes, but if you are that strongly committed to your cause, then prove it and don't do it. Easier said than done.
Mormons believe in bigamy. Think it?s their god-given right to be wed to several women at the same time. Some religions preach violence against Christians and Jews. Hardcore Christians think that homosexuality should be discriminated against. In some countries, deserting your religion can be punishable by death. What about sacrificing a virgin? Think the Government should allow this because a small group of fundamentalists feel that its their right due to their religion?
There?s a fine line between religious freedom and enforcing the law. It?s not a question about Big Brother, or the Fed becoming control freaks. It?s a question about Common Sense, and protecting citizens. Freedom of Religion protects against Blasphemy, against forcing one to adopt a belief against his will, and such. If a woman wants to wear a facemask in public because her belief calls for it, she can. If a man wants to kneel in public and pray, he can. If a man wants to stand on the street corner and preach the word, he can. If a fraud tells people that the more money they give to him, the better they?ll be in the afterlife, he can. Freedom of Religion allows for this.
If a man wants to blow himself up on a street corner in the name of a Higher Force, fortunately, he cannot.(Legally, anyway.) If a family refuses to pay taxes because they feel that they are exempt as their God does not allow them to do this, they cannot. If a mans has the desire to sacrifice his neighbor?s goat, he cannot. Freedom of Religion does not cover this.
If a man says his God does not permit him to be photographed, fine. Take a bus.
Note this is sarcasm.
Should all the African-Americans call for special treatment and exclusion because of their race? Should all Italians call for special treatment and exclusion because of their ethnic origins?
No, and neither should the special interests of the evangelical fundamentalists and other fundamentalist cult-groups be able to claim that their religious opinions are supreme to government security.
For those of you who don't live in South Carolina, and especially the Upstate of SC, it is awash with evangelical fundamentalist religious supremacists who breathe hellfire and brimstone about their self-righteousness of religious opinion...and how everyone but the evangelicals are going to heaven and everyone else will be righteously "killed by God" when Jesus returns! I was told this by my direct supervisor in the workplace because I'm not an evangelical and then he proceeded to let one of his buddies threaten me with a knife right in the break area. I was denied raises and regular reviews...it is a horrible place to live and work because of the fundamentalist evangelical hatreds against everyone who doesn't think like they dictate.
The Sheriff of Spartanburg County, Chuck Wright, declared in the public forum of a State Republican Party fundraiser and open REAPERS meeting (Republican Egocentric Activists Pushing Evangelical Religious Supremacy) that his political and religious opinions are "...what God intended." And the local press, the Spartanburg Herald-Journal, run by an extreme evangelical publisher and newsstaff, refused to question Sheriff Chucky on his assertion that every non-evangelical like himself was therefore not "...what God intended."
The Sheriff and his partner in crime against the community, the 7th Circuit Solicitor Hank "Trey" Gowdy, even sent in armed police in a jack-booted raid of a local lingerie business named "Priscilla's" in Spartanburg, SC because they don't think women should dress in lingerie or that the adults in the community should have access to alternative entertainment between consenting adult couples.
That's how crazy the grim REAPERS of the Republican Evangelical Party (REP) are. Fortunately, the Federal Court declared their actions against a completely legitimate business as unconstitutional and made them return all the legal merchandise they stole from them.
Personally, I think Sheriff Chucky Wright and his evangelical buddy 7th Circuit Solicitor Trey Gowdy just wanted free samples without paying.
It's just indicative of what it's like living in a state filled with evangelical KKooKs who are against abiding by the security of America while they claim their religious opinions and cultist beliefs to be "...what God intended."
The Constitution is clear: Nobody should get special treatment because of their racial, religious, or ethnic bigotries.
This is NOT about your safety, it's ALL about controlling you!
And all of this is based on the complete LIE that is the "official" story of 9/11. Research it!!
Google videos: 9/11 Press for Truth, Loose Change, 9/11 Mysteries, Terror Storm
These are rights. Just because the gov't tells you they're privileges doesn't make it so.
This is the mindset that needs to change in this country.
The gov't should fear the people, not vice versa!
The "official" story of 9/11 is a LIE!!
www.911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
I hope a serious challenge to the REAL ID pops up.