Закон Real ID: Требования к удостоверениям личности в США

2005 United States law on identification documents

The Real ID Act of 2005 (stylized as REAL ID Act of 2005) is an Act of Congress that establishes requirements that driver licenses and identification cards issued by U. S. states and territories must satisfy to be accepted for accessing federal government facilities and nuclear power plants and for boarding airline flights in the United States. The requirements include verification of the personal information presented when applying for the identification document, security features on the document, and electronic sharing of databases between states. The act also made various modifications to U. S. immigration law regarding asylum, border security, deportation, and certain work visas. Enacted in response to the September 11 attacks, the provisions regarding identification documents were originally intended to take effect in 2008, but enforcement was repeatedly delayed due to widespread opposition and refusal by many state governments to implement them. Eventually states began to comply in 2012, and enforcement began in 2014 for certain federal facilities. After numerous extensions, by 2020 all states were certified as compliant, and by 2024 all territories were certified as well. as of 2024, the final and most significant phase of the implementation, regarding identification documents accepted for boarding flights, was scheduled for May 7, 2025, after being postponed many times.

In the United States, driver licenses and identification cards issued by the states and territories are widely used as a form of identification. Prior to the Real ID Act, each state and territory set its own rules regarding the issuance of such cards, including what documents must be provided to obtain one, what information was displayed on the card, and its security features. In December 2004, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA), enacted to implement the commission's recommendations, directed the Secretary of Transportation to form a negotiated rulemaking committee with representatives from state governments and the Department of Homeland Security, to issue regulations establishing standards for identification documents issued by the states, and prohibited federal agencies from accepting identification documents that did not conform to these standards. In February 2005, less than two months after IRTPA was enacted, the House of Representatives passed the Real ID Act as H. R. 418, introduced by Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R WI). The bill would repeal the provisions regarding identification documents in IRTPA, replace them with a version that would set the federal standards directly rather than in negotiation with the states, and would make various changes to U. S. immigration law regarding asylum, border security and deportation. In March, the text of the Real ID Act was appended as a rider on an omnibus spending bill, H. R. 1268, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief 2005, which was passed by the House. The Senate removed the Real ID Act from the bill, added sections regarding visas for workers, and passed it in April. In May, the conference report merging the bill versions, including the Real ID Act added by the House and the visa sections added by the Senate, was agreed to by both houses, and the bill was signed into law by President George W. Bush on May 11, 2005. Although the title of the law has the term REAL ID in all capitals, it does not provide a meaning for REAL as an acronym. On December 17, 2018, Congress amended the Real ID Act to remove an outdated reference to the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (terminated in 1994) and to clarify that citizens of its successor Freely Associated States (Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau) were eligible for driver licenses and identification cards when admitted to the United States. On March 27, 2020, the CARES Act, enacted in response to the COVID 19 pandemic, extended the deadline for states to comply with the Real ID Act to at least September 30, 2021. On December 27, 2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 amended the Real ID Act to accept electronic versions of identification documents, and to exempt states from requiring applicants to provide documentation of their Social Security number, such as their Social Security card. In states that chose not to require such documentation, applicants were still required to provide their Social Security number, which states would verify directly with the Social Security Administration. The amendment also repealed federal funds that the original law had provided for states to assist in their compliance. Applicants must provide at least two documents showing their address, but these documents do not need to be verified further. Birth certificates must be verified through the Electronic Verification of Vital Events (EVVE) system maintained by the National Association for Public Health Statistics and Information Systems (NAPHSIS), rather than the authority that issued the certificate. U. S. passports and U. S. visas on foreign passports must be verified with the Department of State, but the foreign passports themselves do not need to be verified with the issuing authority. The system used to share databases of identification documents between states and territories is the State to State (S2S) Verification Service, supported by the State Pointer Exchange Services (SPEXS) platform, developed by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) with federal funds. Although the Real ID Act requires that states and territories share their databases, this requirement was not included in the DHS criteria to certify their compliance. States and territories are still allowed to issue identification documents that do not satisfy the Real ID requirements, but in this case the document must state that it may not be accepted for federal purposes. The Real ID Act expanded this provision, allowing a waiver of any laws that could interfere with the construction. Other sections of the Real ID Act ordered some reports and pilot projects related to border security.

The original Real ID Act, H. R.418, was approved by the House on February 10, 2005, by a vote of 261–161. At the insistence of the bill's sponsor and then House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Sensenbrenner, the Real ID Act was subsequently attached by the House Republican leadership as a rider to H. R.1268, a bill dealing with emergency appropriations for the Iraq War and with the 2004 tsunami relief funding, which was widely regarded as a must pass bill. The Senate passed H. R.1268 on April 21, 2005, without the Real ID Act. However, the Real ID Act was reinserted in the conference report on H. R.1268 that was then passed by the House on May 5, 2005, by a 368–58 vote, and unanimously by the Senate on May 10, 2005. A May 3, 2005, statement by the American Immigration Lawyers Association said: "Because Congress held no hearings or meaningful debate on the legislation and amended it to a must pass spending bill, the Real ID Act did not receive the scrutiny necessary for most measures, and most certainly not the level required for a measure of this importance and impact. Consistent with the lack of debate and discussion, conference negotiations also were held behind closed doors, with Democrats prevented from participating." On February 28, 2007, Senator Daniel Akaka (D HI) introduced the Identification Security Enhancement Act of 2007, to repeal the Real ID Act and restore the equivalent provisions of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, which provided more regulatory flexibility with state participation. Seven Democratic and Republican senators cosponsored the bill. Committee hearings were held but the bill did not advance. A similar bill was introduced on February 16, 2007, by Representative Tom Allen (D ME), with 41 cosponsors, all Democrats. This bill did not advance either. A more limited bill, introduced on February 13, 2007, by Senator Susan Collins (R ME), with four cosponsors, would have extended the deadlines for states to comply with the Real ID Act. On June 15, 2009, Senator Daniel Akaka introduced the PASS ID Act, which would replace the Real ID Act with a similar law without some of the requirements that were considered excessive, such as the obligation to verify documents with the issuing authority and shared databases. The bill passed the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs but did not advance further.

A large number of state legislatures strongly opposed the Real ID Act, before the states eventually complied with it years later. On February 16, 2007, the Utah legislature unanimously passed a resolution opposing the Real ID Act. The resolution stated that Real ID was "in opposition to the Jeffersonian principles of individual liberty, free markets, and limited government", and that "the use of identification based security cannot be justified as part of a 'layered' security system if the costs of the identification 'layer'—in dollars, lost privacy, and lost liberty—are greater than the security identification provides". Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington joined Maine and Utah in passing legislation opposing the Real ID Act. Similar resolutions were introduced in the District of Columbia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. On April 16, 2009, the Missouri House of Representatives passed a bill prohibiting the state from complying with the Real ID Act, by a vote of 83–69 and 3 present. On May 13, 2009, the Missouri Senate unanimously passed the bill 43–0. Missouri Governor Jay Nixon signed this bill into law on July 13, 2009. This law was later repealed in 2017. Alaska also repealed its anti Real ID law in 2017. In the 2012 Florida Legislative Session, the anti Real ID bill HB 109 and its Senate companion S 220 were introduced. Named the Florida Driver's License Citizen Protection Act, it would require discontinuation of several of the federally mandated provisions of the Real ID Act and destruction of copies of U. S. citizens' documents from the government database. That bill died in Transportation and Highway Safety Subcommittee on March 9, 2012.

Some critics claimed that the Real ID Act violated the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution as a federal legislation in an area that, under the terms of the Tenth Amendment, was the province of the states. Anthony Romero, the executive director of the ACLU, stated: "Real ID is an unfunded mandate that violates the Constitution's 10th Amendment on state powers, destroys states' dual sovereignty and consolidates every American's private information, leaving all of us far more vulnerable to identity thieves". Former Republican Representative Bob Barr wrote in a February 2008 article: "A person not possessing a Real ID Act compliant identification card could not enter any federal building, or an office of his or her congressman or senator or the U. S. Capitol. This effectively denies that person their fundamental rights to assembly and to petition the government as guaranteed in the First Amendment". The DHS final rule regarding implementation of the Real ID Act discussed a number of constitutional concerns raised by the commenters on the proposed version of this rule. The DHS explicitly rejected the assertion that the implementation of the Real ID Act would lead to violations of the citizens' individual constitutional rights. In relation to the Tenth Amendment argument about violation of states' constitutional rights, the DHS rule acknowledged that these concerns had been raised by a number of individual commenters and in the comments by some states. The DHS rule did not attempt to rebuff the Tenth Amendment argument directly, but said that the DHS was acting in accordance with the authority granted to it by the Real ID Act and that DHS had been and would be working closely with the states on the implementation of the Real ID Act. On March 17, 2008, the attorneys filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U. S. Supreme Court to hear their "constitutional challenge to the Secretary's decision waiving nineteen federal laws, and all state and local legal requirements related to them, in connection with the construction of a barrier along a portion of the border with Mexico". They questioned whether the preclusion of judicial review amounted to an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power and whether the "grant of waiver authority violates Article I's requirement that a duly enacted law may be repealed only by legislation approved by both Houses of Congress and presented to the President". On April 17, 2008, numerous amicus briefs "supporting the petition were filed on behalf of 14 members of Congress, a diverse coalition of conservation, religious and Native American organizations, and 28 law professors and constitutional scholars". The Supreme Court denied the petition on June 23, 2008.

Many privacy rights advocates charged that by creating a national system electronically storing vast amounts of detailed personal data about individuals, the Real ID Act increased the chance of such data being stolen and thus raised the risk of identity theft. The Bush administration, in the DHS final rule regarding the Real ID Act implementation, countered that the security precautions regarding handling sensitive personal data and hiring workers for this task, which were specified in the Real ID Act and in the rule, provided sufficient protections against unauthorized use and theft of such personal data. Supporters of the Real ID Act, such as the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation, dismissed this criticism under the grounds that states would be permitted by law to share data only when validating someone's identity. The Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee, which was established to advise the Department of Homeland Security on privacy related issues, released a statement regarding the Department of Homeland Security's proposed rules for the standardization of state driver licenses on May 7, 2007. The committee stated that "Given that these issues have not received adequate consideration, the Committee feels it is important that the following comments do not constitute an endorsement of REAL ID or the regulations as workable or appropriate", and "The issues pose serious risks to an individual's privacy and, without amelioration, could undermine the stated goals of the REAL ID Act".

The Real ID Act requires that states and territories include an individual's gender on each driver license and identification card issued. The requirements for changing the recorded gender varied by jurisdiction, from merely a personal request to additional documentation such as a court order or proof of surgery. Some scholars criticized the inclusion of gender markers in identification documents, pointing to the ineffectiveness of gender in confirming a person's identity or due to privacy concerns of transgender individuals.

Many immigrant and civil rights advocates felt that the changes related to evidentiary standards and the immigration officers' discretion in asylum cases, contained in the Real ID Act, would prevent many legitimate asylum seekers from obtaining asylum. For example, scholars pointed to how the Real ID Act placed more emphasis on applicant account discrepancies to determine asylum seekers as "incredible" and discretion on additional corroboration requirements, which discounted potential trauma related psychological and other barriers related to persecution that might affect testimony accounts. Additionally, a 2005 article in LCCR sponsored Civil Rights Monitor stated, "The bill also contained changes to asylum standards, which according to LCCR, would prevent many legitimate asylum seekers from obtaining safe haven in the United States. These changes gave immigration officials broad discretion to demand certain evidence to support an asylum claim, with little regard to whether the evidence can realistically be obtained; as well as the discretion to deny claims based on such subjective factors as 'demeanor'. Critics said the reason for putting such asylum restrictions into what was being sold as an anti terrorism bill was unclear, given that suspected terrorists are already barred from obtaining asylum or any other immigration benefit". Similarly, some immigration and human rights advocacy groups maintained that the Real ID Act provided an overly broad definition of "terrorist activity" that would prevent some deserving categories of applicants from gaining asylum or refugee status in the United States. A November 2007 report by Human Rights Watch raised this criticism specifically in relation to former child soldiers who had been forcibly and illegally recruited to participate in an armed group.

In 2020, the section of the Real ID Act waiving laws that could interfere with construction of the border barrier had a negative impact on the natural and cultural environment of the border area. One example was at Quitobaquito Springs in the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in Arizona, one of the only reliable above ground water sources in the Sonoran Desert and home to the endangered Sonoyta pupfish and Sonora mud turtle. The spring and surrounding lands are also sacred to the Hia C eḍ Oʼodham and Tohono Oʼodham peoples. Due to construction of the border barrier, the flow of water declined precipitously from March 2020, and threatened the cultural landscape as well as the two endangered species, along with other desert animals and plants that relied on the water.