Implementing the REAL ID Act: Intergovernmental Conflict and Cooperation in Homeland Security Policy

This article examines implementation of the REAL ID Act of 2005, a post-9/11 measure intended to make driver’s licenses more secure. I take the opportunity, fifteen years after the Act’s passage and approaching a key October 2020 deadline, to analyze and explain how federal officials overcame obstacles to REAL ID implementation, especially resistance from elected state officials. I conclude that the role of administrative officials within the Department of Homeland Security and their ability to work with administrative officials in state Department of Motor Vehicle offices was critical to overcoming state resistance and leading states to come into alignment with REAL ID requirements. A key lesson is that overcoming state–federal conflict in policy implementation is possible when administrative officials at the state and federal level are key actors and can collaborate and perceive common interests. This analysis demonstrates the importance of direct interaction between federal and state administrative officials in program implementation.

Salience, complexity and state resistance to federal mandates

Although state resistance to federal mandates is a prevalent characteristic of contemporary American federalism, little is known about the factors that separate resisting states from states that do not oppose federal policy. This article examines state resistance through a framework that classifies public policies by salience and complexity and identifies societal interests and government officials who are hypothesised to influence policy making on issues of varying types. These hypotheses are investigated in the context of state resistance to four federal laws – the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, No Child Left Behind Act, Help America Vote Act and REAL ID Act. The results of the statistical analysis demonstrate the centrality of the characteristics of citizens, elected officials and specialised interest groups in conditioning state resistance to federal mandates. These results suggest that state resistance can be characterised as a strategic response to federal mandates that varies systematically across types of public policies.

Researching the Civil Rights and Liberties of Western Muslims

Suspicion of Muslim minorities in Western countries did not start with the attacks of September 11, 2001. The post 9/ll period, however, amplified existing prejudice. Muslims have come under intense scrutiny on the chance that they might be terrorists and have been targeted by most of the counter-terrorist measures adopted since then. In the United States, the initial objective was to catch foreign radicals, as illustrated by the FBI’s massive investigation called “PENTTBOM” which sought to identify aliens involved in the attacks. Additional measures such as the Absconder Apprehension Initiative (AAl) and the implementation of the National Security Entry-Exit registration System (NSEERS), adopted in 2002, targeted foreign Muslims. The enactment of new statutory provisions designed to identify and apprehend foreign terrorists was soon followed by a catch-all strategy targeting all Muslims living in the US. Furthermore, the broad definition of what constitutes a terrorist threat (as developed by the 2001 PATRIOT Act, the 2005 REAL ID Act, and the 2007 Protect America Act) has allowed US authorities to extend the list of terrorist offenses–leading to increased infringement on civil liberties in the name of security. Governmental discrimination also fueled prejudice against Muslims by providing ajustification for anti-Muslim sentiments. A large section of the public welcomed racial/ethnic profiling and various measures limiting the civil rights and the civil liberties of Muslims as a way to improve homeland security.

Out of Control? The Real ID Act of 2005

The tragic events of September 11, 2001, created an environment that was conducive to the expansion of surveillance operations. Furthermore, the Bush Administration’s belief that the power of the presidency allows for any action, in the name of national security, led to the gathering of information about both terrorists and ordinary citizens. The Real ID Act of 2005 is a piece of legislation that requires, among other things, that state licensing agencies verify, collect, store, and share an increased amount of personal information. Opponents of this legislation are concerned about the financial, technological, privacy, and security implications of a law that was enacted with little to no due diligence. Currently, the requirements of the Real ID Act have been forced into an immigration bill in the Senate. Fortunately for those opposed to the Real ID Act, the Democratic majority currently in Congress appear to be more concerned with protecting the freedoms and liberties of American citizens than the Republican majority was when they originally passed the Real ID Act legislation in 2005. Ultimately, this chapter seeks to provide the reader with a thorough discussion into the many concerns associated with the Real ID Act.

Waiving Environmental Concerns Along the Border: Fence Construction and the Waiver Authority of the Real ID Act

In 1994, the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) instituted a border enforcement policy aimed at deterring illegal immigration along strategic points of the United States’ southern border by increasing the presence of border patrol agents and constructing physical barriers. 3 The INS anticipated that securing conventional routes of entry would force illegal immigrants to more remote and rugged sections of the border that would be more difficult to traverse.4 The ultimate success of the policy has been debated, but it did result in a substantial decrease of illegal entries in places like San Diego, California and El Paso, Texas.5 As anticipated, the number of attempted illegal entries also increased along more remote sections of the border, although it is unclear that the inhospitable terrain has deterred significant numbers of illegal immigrants from crossing the border.

Out of Control? The Real ID Act of 2005

The tragic events of September 11, 2001, created an environment that was conducive to the expansion of surveillance operations. Furthermore, the Bush Administration’s belief that the power of the presidency allows for any action, in the name of national security, led to the gathering of information about both terrorists and ordinary citizens. The Real ID Act of 2005 is a piece of legislation that requires, among other things, that state licensing agencies verify, collect, store, and share an increased amount of personal information. Opponents of this legislation are concerned about the financial, technological, privacy, and security implications of a law that was enacted with little to no due diligence. Currently, the requirements of the Real ID Act have been forced into an immigration bill in the Senate. Fortunately for those opposed to the Real ID Act, the Democratic majority currently in Congress appear to be more concerned with protecting the freedoms and liberties of American citizens than the Republican majority was when they originally passed the Real ID Act legislation in 2005. Ultimately, this chapter seeks to provide the reader with a thorough discussion into the many concerns associated with the Real ID Act.