Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rocking the Bus - A Colorado woman takes a stand against arbitrary ID checks.
reason magazine ^ | November 30, 2005 | Jacob Sullum

Posted on 11/30/2005 11:34:30 AM PST by JTN

The first time she was asked to show identification while riding the bus to work, Deborah Davis was so startled that she complied without thinking. But the more she thought about it, the less sense it made.

That's how Davis, a 50-year-old Colorado woman with four grown children and five grandchildren, ended up getting dragged off the bus by federal security officers, who handcuffed her, took her to their station, and cited her for two misdemeanors. Davis, who is scheduled to be arraigned on December 9, is risking 60 days in jail to show her fellow Americans that they don't need to blindly obey every dictate imposed in the name of security.

The public bus that Davis took to her office job in Lakewood, Colorado, crosses the Denver Federal Center, a 90-building complex occupied by agencies such as the U.S. Geological Survey, the Interior Department, the General Services Administration, and the Bureau of Land Management. "The facility is not high security," says Davis. "It's not Area 51 or NORAD or the Rocky Mountain Arsenal."

Guards nevertheless board buses as they enter the complex and demand IDs from passengers, whether or not they're getting off there. According to Davis, the guards barely glance at the IDs, let alone write down names or check them against a list.

"It's just an obedience test," says Gail Johnson, a lawyer recruited to represent Davis by the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado. "It does nothing for security."

Ahmad Taha, supervisory special agent with the Federal Protective Service, which is in charge of security at the Denver complex, said guards there have been checking the IDs of bus passengers since 9/11. He declined to explain the security rationale for this ritual or to comment on Davis' case.

After complying the first day she rode the bus, Davis began saying she had no ID and was not getting off at the Federal Center anyway. One Friday in late September, a guard told her she would not be permitted to ride the bus anymore without ID.

Before taking the stand that led to her arrest, Davis says, "I spent the weekend making sure that the Constitution hadn't changed since I was in the eighth grade, and it hadn't....We're not required to carry papers....We have a right to be anonymous."

Last year the Supreme Court ruled that a suspect in a criminal investigation can be required to give his name. But it has never upheld a policy of requiring ordinary citizens to carry ID and present it on demand. Davis "wasn't doing anything wrong," notes Johnson. "She wasn't suspected of doing anything wrong. She was a completely innocent person on the way to work."

Johnson plans to argue that the ID requirement violates Davis' First Amendment right to freedom of association, her Fourth Amendment right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures, and her Fifth Amendment right not to be deprived of liberty (in this case, freedom of travel) without due process. A civil case raising similar issues in the context of airport ID checks is scheduled to be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit the day before Davis' arraignment.

"Enough is enough," says Davis. "Our rights are being taken away a little piece at a time, and people are letting it happen."

Pulling out your driver's license may seem like a slight imposition, but the justification is even slighter. Since anyone can flash an ID, the procedure does not distinguish between people who pose a threat and people who don't. It does not even distinguish between people who are visiting the Federal Center and people who are merely riding a bus that happens to pass through it.

In a free country, citizens have no obligation to explain themselves to the government as they go about their daily lives. It's the government that owes us an explanation.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Government; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: 1984; 4thamendment; aclulist; bigbrother; jackbootlickers; jbts; libertarian; surveillance
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 461-471 next last
I wonder if the guards said, "Your papers, Comrade?" when they asked for ID.
1 posted on 11/30/2005 11:34:33 AM PST by JTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

You were interested in the traffic tracking cell phone article. Thought you might want to see this.


2 posted on 11/30/2005 11:36:58 AM PST by JTN ("We must win the War on Drugs by 2003." - Dennis Hastert, Feb. 25 1999)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
the procedure does not distinguish between people who pose a threat and people who don't.

And, pray tell, how do we know the difference?

3 posted on 11/30/2005 11:38:21 AM PST by Michael.SF. (Paris Hilton - Living proof that one need not be poor to be White Trash)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: albertp; Allosaurs_r_us; Abram; AlexandriaDuke; Americanwolf; Annie03; Baby Bear; bassmaner; ...

Libertarian Ping.


4 posted on 11/30/2005 11:38:22 AM PST by JTN ("We must win the War on Drugs by 2003." - Dennis Hastert, Feb. 25 1999)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1531193/posts

more comment--

5 posted on 11/30/2005 11:39:21 AM PST by rellimpank (Don't believe anything about firearms or explosives stated by the mass media---NRABenefactor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN

This is misleading because every small antiBush ACLU lawyer infested county in America will get you doing hard jail time or even virtualy shot if you do not show papers.

The ACLU will always get your papers. That is how they're powerful and becoming the big big brothers and then does facade hypocrite suits against a fed goc. like this.


6 posted on 11/30/2005 11:39:37 AM PST by JudgemAll (Condemn me, make me naked and kill me, or be silent for ever on my gun ownership and law enforcement)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN

I have qualms about siding with the ACLU on any issue...

But I agree with Ms. Davis. The perumptory flashing of ID's does nothing to enhance anyone's security.


7 posted on 11/30/2005 11:40:21 AM PST by Choose Ye This Day (Win the war. Confirm the judges. Cut the taxes. Control the spending. Secure the border.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
crosses the Denver Federal Center, a 90-building complex occupied by agencies such as the U.S. Geological Survey, the Interior Department, the General Services Administration, and the Bureau of Land Management.

Gee, after the Oklahoma bombing and 911, I guess the Feds can stop worrying huh?

/Sarcasm off

8 posted on 11/30/2005 11:40:24 AM PST by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Michael.SF.
And, pray tell, how do we know the difference?

If they can't tell, then what are they checking for?

9 posted on 11/30/2005 11:41:42 AM PST by JTN ("We must win the War on Drugs by 2003." - Dennis Hastert, Feb. 25 1999)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Michael.SF.
And, pray tell, how do we know the difference?

Easy! Two words - RACIAL PROFILING!

10 posted on 11/30/2005 11:45:06 AM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Choose Ye This Day
I have qualms about siding with the ACLU on any issue...

Sadly, I often don't post articles on subjects that I think are important that mention the ACLU, just because I know that so many people are going to have a visceral reaction to it.

11 posted on 11/30/2005 11:46:20 AM PST by JTN ("We must win the War on Drugs by 2003." - Dennis Hastert, Feb. 25 1999)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JTN

She is entering a federal facility. The FedGuv has a right to restrict access and demand ID. If she does not like it, she can go around.


12 posted on 11/30/2005 11:47:26 AM PST by gridlock (eliminate perverse incentives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
If they can't tell, then what are they checking for?

Opponents of tyrrany.
This is about compliance, not security.

13 posted on 11/30/2005 11:48:40 AM PST by ctdonath2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JTN
If they can't tell, then what are they checking for?

The same thing customs agents are looking for: lack of eye contact, nervousness, something out of the ordinary, something that may set one person apart from the crowd. Plus presence equals deterrence.

Many of the same people who bitch and moan about these inconveniences are the same ones who will scream "Why didn't Bush do more" if a bomb goes off.

14 posted on 11/30/2005 11:49:35 AM PST by Michael.SF. (Paris Hilton - Living proof that one need not be poor to be White Trash)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JTN
Everything seems to be in order here, Mr. Atta. Have a nice day!
15 posted on 11/30/2005 11:50:54 AM PST by Alouette (Talent on loan from ZOG)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: southern rock
Two words - RACIAL PROFILING!

But, but, that would be DISCRIMINATION!!! We can't have that!!

/sarcasm

16 posted on 11/30/2005 11:51:24 AM PST by Michael.SF. (Paris Hilton - Living proof that one need not be poor to be White Trash)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JTN

Sad indeed. Many righteous issues are hijacked by the left as liberal causes, when in truth they concern all Americans, regardless of party lines. As another poster states, we should be preventing dangerous people from getting into the country in the first place; not trying to sift through the masses and figure out who's who.


17 posted on 11/30/2005 11:52:11 AM PST by two134711 (I have libertarian leanings, but my conservatism keeps those in check.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JTN
I agree that the practice described is inappropriate, on legal and practical grounds. Heck, wouldn't it be faster and cheaper to re-route the buses around the complex, than employ guards to board every bus and look at IDs of every single passenger every day???

But I take issue with this claim: We have a right to be anonymous. That's exactly what all the illegal immigrant workers and illegal immigrant and felon voters and sleeper cell terrorists are relying on: "Nobody has a right to demand I prove who I really am unless I'm charged with a specific crime." As has been wisely said many times before, the Constitution is not a suicide pact. It's high time we got serious about developing a top-notch biometric national ID system. No papers to carry, just yourself.

18 posted on 11/30/2005 11:54:37 AM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gridlock

Sorry folks the reason your bus is held up is because we have to check ID's as people get off the bus and not while they are approaching the Federal Building. We are sure you do not mind the inconvenience caused by one lady who wishes to maintain her privacy. (sarc)


19 posted on 11/30/2005 11:54:40 AM PST by Sterco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JTN
Before taking the stand that led to her arrest, Davis says, "I spent the weekend making sure that the Constitution hadn't changed since I was in the eighth grade, and it hadn't....We're not required to carry papers....We have a right to be anonymous."

Things might have changed since the early 80's, but I had a friend, Ed Lawson, who used to get busted in California all the time for refusing to produce an ID when demanded by the Police.

He was an African American with the matted hairstyle popular at the time, and I guess he could look a little intimidating. On Mondays, he would go walking in nice nieghborhoods and get himself picked up by the police, who would hold him until Wednesday. I worked with him on sound and lighting over the weekends. He had a regular schedule.

He was trying to bring a case to trial to challenge California's ID law. I don't know if he was ever successful, because he was still doing it when I left the state.

20 posted on 11/30/2005 11:55:03 AM PST by gridlock (eliminate perverse incentives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 461-471 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson