Rocking the Bus - A Colorado woman takes a stand against arbitrary ID checks.

reason magazine ^ | November 30, 2005 | Jacob Sullum

[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.

[gridlock]

When was the last time you were at a Federal Office Building. Near as I can tell, they have all required IDs since the Oklahoma City bombing.

[Petruchio]

Of course, my argument is that this is irrelevant.

This is where you become irrelevant.

[gridlock]

Maybe someone can explain to me how driving past a USGS building on the "facility" (a campus, really) is any different in security term from driving past the headquarters in Menlo Park.

All the defenders want to argue is the "authority", not the logic.

The difference in authority is obvious. Once you enter a federal facility, the government has much greater powers.

As for the logic, consider that this facility is a former munitions plant. As such, it certainly had strong perimeter security and not much by way of internal security. A look at the overheads on Google Maps (the greatest time-waster, other than FR, in the Universe) shows control gates, a continuous fence, and perimeter patrol roads.

The buildings, however, are likely very difficult to secure. One thing about munitions plants is that they have a lot of doors, so you can get out in a hurry. Typically, the buildings will have a door every hundred feet, at a minimum, as is required for building codes for a High Hazard structure. A cursory glance at the map shows that there is over 20,000 feet of building perimeter, or at least 200 doors.

Now, as a practical problem, you can secure four gates and a perimeter road or 200 doors. Which would you choose, given you have the statutory authority to do either?

[Petruchio]

She was never in a Federal Office Building. She was in a Bus. (aka Public Transportation)

Big Difference (huge actually) in jurisdiction between the two.

[gridlock]

Saying "no" when all alone and confronted by armed thugs is one of the bravest things any human can do.

Oh puhleez! What were they going to do, rough her up? Toss her in Gitmo?

[gridlock]

Governments don't have "rights". Only "powers".

Duly noted and corrected. My carelessness. Sorry.

[gridlock]

Just because some bozo puts up a sign doesn't mean that they have the authority to trump the Constitution or the Rights of a Free people.

The government has the authority to control access to federal facilities. This has been established by Congress and upheld in the courts. It is not just some Bozo putting up a sign.

[gridlock]

This is where you become irrelevant.

Oh, because being on a bus inside a federal facility means you are on private property. Right.

Legally speaking, this woman's argument is a complete non-starter. The authority of the government is crystal clear on this point. They are permitted to control access and require ID.

[gridlock]

She was never in a Federal Office Building. She was in a Bus. (aka Public Transportation) Big Difference (huge actually) in jurisdiction between the two.

Not true. She was inside a federal facility. She was on a road inside the facility, subject to all the rules of the facility. The statutory authority is exactly the same as if she were inside the walls of a Federal Office Building. There is no distinction in the law.

The means of conveyance is irrelevant. Being on a bus has nothing to do with it, particularly because she could have gotten off the bus at any time.

This woman's entire argument boils down to her contention that she should be treated as if she were on a public road when in fact she was not. It is a non-starter.

[Petruchio]

Please use correct terms.

1-She was on Public Transportation, NOT a POV.

2-Public Transportation travels on a fixed route, thus it is not a discresionary route.

3-This route traverses a Federal Campus NOT a Facility.

4-Her paid ride goes through the Federal Campus. She never exits the Bus during this portion of her paid ride.

5-At no time is she in a Federal Facility, she is in a Bus traversing a Campus.

[Allosaurs_r_us]

There is a heck of a lot of this story the MSM finds it to their advantage to leave out of this story. This is nothing new. It was documented here on FR several weeks ago.

 

What they are not telling the public is, the defendant had the choice to either show her ID or get off of the bus and find a way around the Federal facility. She is being nothing more than a pain in the ass! She chose not to produce ID. Not only that, when she was given the choice to leave the bus or show ID, she refused to the point of resisting. Why is it now the MSM finds it convenient to leave this out?

 

I think everyone will agree we have tightened security on federal facilities since 9/11. Why is it this particular citizen wants to put herself in the same boat as a terrorist? Is it really asking to much for us to show our ID when crossing a federal reservation? Haven't we found, by not being careful what can happen? Granted this res is more than likely never going to be a target, but we all know policy is policy, we cannot say we can use it in one area and not the other. It is FEDERAL POLICY involving all fed property.

 

My question is, how patriotic are we? Was, or is, this policy asking to much of us? What are we as citizens willing to put up with in order to do our part in homeland security? If this women objected to showing her ID, why did she just not get off of the bus and go around the res? She did not HAVE to show her ID! There was an alternative, yet she chose to make a stink and bring herself into the limelight for what I, myself, consider to be extremely trivial. I do not agree we should have to show our "papers" under normal circumstances, but this was federal policy, entering a federal res. I have no qualms doing what the government, with good reason, has set into policy for federal reservations. The solution is quite simple, if you disagree, merely do not take the frikkin' bus across. Get off and go around, problem solved!

 

The MSM have already proven their patriotism in the war on terror. It is non existence or so far to the left it could be considered treasonous. Are we to agree with this sort of propaganda or combat it? If we are to make a judgment are we not to be given all of the facts? Look it up. What I have put forth here is documented.

 

[Allosaurs_r_us]

Please use correct terms.

1-She was on Public Transportation, NOT a POV.

2-Public Transportation travels on a fixed route, thus it is not a discresionary route.

3-This route traverses a Federal Campus NOT a Facility.

4-Her paid ride goes through the Federal Campus. She never exits the Bus during this portion of her paid ride.

5-At no time is she in a Federal Facility, she is in a Bus traversing a Campus.

 

6. How big does the bomb have to be to take out adjacent buildings if the bomber has a package or back pack on the bus? 

[ican'tbelieveit]

What use will the ID check do, as described, if all they are doing is glancing at it, and not recording any information.

Next, what good will an ID check do to stop a bomb in a backpack?

[Petruchio]

How big does the bomb have to be to take out adjacent buildings if the bomber has a package or back pack on the bus?

At the distance from the road that those buildings are, and judging wall composition from original use of the buildings . . .

if you pack the whole bus with something with a brisance higher than what C-4 has, you just might put a few cracks in the walls.

Please be realistic with future questions.

[Allosaurs_r_us]

What use will the ID check do, as described, if all they are doing is glancing at it, and not recording any information.

Next, what good will an ID check do to stop a bomb in a backpack?

Most likely none at all. But if one is out to do bodily harm, and perhaps has forged or counterfeit ID, it will make a difference on whether or not they get on the bus in the first place, or will attract enough attention to raise the interest of those "glancing" over their ID. Nothing is fool proof, but I like to think those that are watching also look for anomalies in behavior or paperwork. I don't ask for miracles, just the slim chance of catching an a$$hole before they kill my fellow citizens.

[GOPPachyderm]

I just wish that we could require identification when voting. I was a poll observer at this last election and there are so many holes it is amazing.

Consider that all you need to do is get someone to say they know who you are and you get to vote. Presumably, you could vote as many times as you're willing to stand in line. I went to lunch to get a sandwich and there was a young woman wearing a Kerry button offering to vouch for people and take them to the polling place.

[Allosaurs_r_us]

if you pack the whole bus with something with a brisance higher than what C-4 has, you just might put a few cracks in the walls.

Please be realistic with future questions.

 

Well I apologize MR. KNOW-IT-ALL! I have never been to this facility, have never seen it on the tube, or ever heard it described, before you so expertly brought it to my attention with your insult. Whether or not a terrorist even damages anything, he will still obviously make a point, which is what they are after in the first place, wouldn't you agree? Maybe not, since I'm sure you believe being asked for your ID in this instance compares to NAZI Germany, right?

 

Does it matter? What I would ask of you, being as you seem to be the expert in this thread, does it matter whether it is a building or human bodies? Since you seem to know every square inch of this federal facility, is there a place on this bus route where you could optimize human suffering, or does that matter at all to your holier than thou opinion? Or better yet, is 100 innocents worse than 1 innocent. Do you put a value on either?

 

Why don't you try to miss the point a little farther. I'm sure you can........... 

 

 

[RGSpincich]

What use will the ID check do, as described, if all they are doing is glancing at it, and not recording any information.

Verifying local residence and/or federal employee status are two functions of the ID check. Regular bus users would probably be local residents and less likely to be on a mission for allah. Security could question those more thoroughly if an out of state or country ID is offered. Federal employees would be cleared to exit the bus on federal property.

[ican'tbelieveit]

If forged/counterfeit ID's are not going to be picked up if all the people are doing is glancing at the presented ID's.

I would be more agreeable to this request for ID if the ID's were recorded in some fashion. But to carelessly glance over them is foolishness and a waste of the commuters time & a waste of my tax dollars paying the wages of those doing this "check."

[ican'tbelieveit]

Again, forged documents won't cover that. Next, the people on this bus are passing through the campus, not necessarily employees getting out of the bus. Employees will have their ID's check as they enter their buildings.