Abstract
This comment argues that states should challenge the Real ID under the federalism principles enshrined in the Tenth Amendment, although the Act's driver licensing provisions infringe on both individual and state constitutional rights. A state challenge under the Tenth Amendment is more likely than modern individual rights jurisprudence to succeed in striking down Real ID. Arguing that the federal government impermissibly coerces state action under the Act will better protect both states and individual rights and succeed in having the Act overturned. Part II of this Comment provides a historical context for the enactment of Real ID and describes its reception by the states. Part III surveys relevant principles of constitutional federalism and discusses three Supreme Court cases commonly cited by states opposing the Act. Part IV argues that the statutory scheme under Real ID interferes with state sovereignty protected by the Tenth Amendment and potentially violates fundamental individual constitutional rights. Finally, Part V concludes that judicial enforcement of the Tenth Amendment in the context of Real ID vindicates both the integrity of state governments and important rights of state citizens.
Recommended Citation
Lindsay Fisher, D&O Insurance: The Tension Between Cooperating with the Insurance Company and Protecting Privileged Information from Third Party Plaintiffs, 32 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 201 (2008).
