Only the government could spend 20 years creating a national ID that no one wanted and that apparently doesn’t even work as a national ID.
But that’s what the federal government has accomplished with the REAL ID, which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) now considers unreliable, even though getting one requires providing proof of citizenship or lawful status in the country.
In a December 11 court filing, Philip Lavoie, the acting assistant special agent in charge of DHS’ Mobile, Alabama, office, stated that, “REAL ID can be unreliable to confirm U.S. citizenship.”
Is that slightly different ID not REAL compliant? If your state decided to make a citizenship determination when issuing some kind of ID, fine, but I don’t think that’s part of the requirements by DHS so I would still say the title is a bit misleading.
The slightly different ID is REAL ID, not just REAL compliant. It looks like it’s similar to how, in my country, driving licenses are coloured differently depending on whether you’ve passed your driving test; A learner’s provision driving license is green, and when you pass your test, you get a pink one.
Right, REAL is basically a set of compliance requirements for issuance. My point is that states can do their own thing for the most part regarding their identifications, like driving restrictions and documents that would, in theory, prove citizenship… If that were in the jurisdiction of the state government. It’s determined at the federal level, and while federal regulations determine REAL compliance, those same compliance requirements don’t require citizenship. So there is a gap to say REAL ID -> proof of citizenship