One step forward, two steps back.

I went to the Pawtucket DMV last week to transfer my registration and was going to update my license while there. I was told that I needed my social security card to do so which I hadn’t thought to bring with me that day.

In light of the recent DMV workers who were caught falsifying licenses for illegal immigrants with fake or stolen social security numbers I thought the request was reasonable and decided I would just return at a later date to complete that particular transaction.

I don't understand why the ACLU is getting involved when it is obvious we need to prove that people who are driving on our roads are being fairly licensed (meaning they have taken a road test, understand the signage used on the roads, understand the insurance requirements mandated by the state, they can prove they are the person they are representing themselves as, etc.) and are properly documented and accounted for.

What is the big deal about showing this document if it helps keep ineligible drivers off our roads?

The driver's license is the defacto national ID in this country. Employers take the driver's license to be proof by a government agency that the person is legally in the country. There should be a legal presence requirement to get a license. Imigration is a federal issue and covered under the supremacy clause. By statute, licenses can only be issued to residents. How can Rhode Island declare someone a resident whose very presence violates federal law?

I wonder if the ACLU people would feel the same way if people got drivers' licenses in their names.

The point is that the number is matched to the name and date of birth on record at the Social Security Administration. A Social Security Card does not have a photo and does nothing to enhance security of driver's licenses. The number being matched to the SSA database is where the security is. Requiring the card be displayed was an unnecessary burden that did not increase security.

"requiring the card be displayed was an unnecessary burden that did not increase security"

I wouldnt care if I had to show my social security card along with proof of residence and anything else they can come up with to positively identify me as who I say I am EACH AND EVERY TIME I went in the DMV for ANY reason - IF it meant it helped curb abuses of the system.

Can the ProJo do a poll to see if RI residents object to showing their social secuirty card? or if this is just the ACLU objecting?

I also have no problem whatsoever providing my SSN or passport or whatever if it will help prevent any fraud in the least. It seems to me that people with something to hide are the ones that object to submitting id to verify they are who they say. However if Mr Brown of the ACLU were to get tickets in the mail for a vehicle that he doesn't own but is registered in his name, he might feel a little bit different. Oh thats right we are just the pee-ons. We are the fools that follow the rules and we are the ones that get our rights violated! Law abiding citizens WAKE UP!! We are the ones being discriminated against!! It doesnt pay to obey the law. Come to this country illegally, defraud the social service programs, get free healthcare and housing assistance and drive that new Escalade or Lexus. Ill just peddle along in my 91 Chevy while I pay for it. Do I sound bitter? Maybe but I feel offended and no one cares about that!!

I think the ACLU should be proud. Another nail in the coffin of the state's finances, one step closer to bankruptcy.

Destruction is welcomed in baby steps. The real test will be what the attorney of record will be doing in a couple of years when the last business leaves the state.

I suspect he'll be saying, "....but I meant well."

what we need is for an illegal immigrant to be involved in a car accident with one of these liberal aclu people for them to open their eyes and stop supporting illegal immigration.

It just so happens that I work for a company that is in the process of renewing the entire computer system for licensing and registration in the state of Rhode Island, and various other states.

Even when you do not have your SS-card with you, your information will be crosschecked against a variety of other databases to detect forms of fraude. In one or more of those crosschecks your SSN will come up, unless it is your first application for ID or DL.

The requirement that the state of RI placed on bringing your SS-card was to ensure that there is no wrong information in the systems. As proven last year, fraude can happen by giving out licenses to people who are illegal in this country. All the states that are considered "border-states" have been urged by federal authorities to increase the methods of identity-assurance. The requirement to bring your SS-card was part of that method.

Wendy Becker, the person who filed this claim with the ACLU, may have misplaced her SS-card, which could have been re-issued for free (in a 10 minute transaction) at the Social Security Office upon establishing her identity in the form of showing her birth certificate and supporting documentation. I guess taking the state to the courthouse was an easier procedure.