Now we are going to need passports to fly in the US? This can't be constitutional.

This is the first I have heard of this law that is ready to go into effect on January 1, 2016. If you live in MN, LA, NH, and NY then you better get ready, especially MN which has no waiver on this law and goes into effect in 2 months. This is crazy.

I apologize if this is not the proper forum for this. Please move if you feel it belongs somewhere else.

A law requiring a passport book or passport card for domestic travel goes into effect in 2016. The United States Congress passed H.R. 22 when it passed the House of Representatives on January 6, 2015, and the Senate on July 30, 2015. Currently, the bill is in the phase just prior to being signed into law by President Obama. This new law will be attached to the tax code in section 7345. The title of section 7345 is “Revocation or Denial of Passport in Case of Certain Tax Delinquencies.”
Read more at www.inquisitr.com... KgIL.99

www.inquisitr.com...

a reply to: lcbjr1979

i dont know dude
the inquisitr?
just saying

Unconstitutional how?


If you're driving you should be alright, but flying is different.



Question you don't have to answer;
How does this affect you in the long run?
Or is it just a first world problem?

a reply to: TinySickTears

The sources in the article are solid. The inquisitr is reliable in my opinion.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I feel like someone will sue due to not being able to fly because the IRS said so. I think the Supreme Court will rule that this law is unconstitutional. I don't know. Im not a lawyer.

a reply to: TinySickTears

HR 22

www.congress.gov...

a reply to: lcbjr1979

About 10 years ago the feds raised the standards for ID's (to prevent counterfeits). The four states you mentioned opted not to change to the new standard. This is the rationale for needing further ID (i.e. a passport) to fly from these states with ID's issued in those states.

Not saying I agree with it. That's just what I understand of this new rule.

For once.... you actually CAN blame it on W.

a reply to: lcbjr1979

But flying is a privilege isn't it?

Not a constitutional right...

Or am I missing the amendment?

originally posted by: lcbjr1979
a reply to: TinySickTears

The sources in the article are solid. The inquisitr is reliable in my opinion.

fair enough
too bad their name and url sucks

a reply to: eluryh22

I see what you are saying. I feel like this could lead to a slippery slope and force other the other states to follow suit in order to be uniform if you know what I mean.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Unconstitutional how?

It violates the Comity Clause of the Constitution. Basically that clause dictates that freedoms are universal between the United States. If I can legally travel within my state, then I can legally travel to any US state without any special requirements being made of me.

If you're driving you should be alright, but flying is different.

Because?

Question you don't have to answer;
How does this affect you in the long run?
Or is it just a first world problem?

It is actually VERY much an issue for the USA and puts the country in second world status in some regards. "Where are your papers?" when traveling inside the borders of the country strikes me as eerily similar to Nazi Germany. Combine that with the highly intrusive nature of the Real ID Act (which is the reason for this foolishness) and we've got one more brick in Orwell's wall.

You would have no reason to know this since you're not American, but on Sept 10, 2001, Americans could freely drive into Canada or Mexico and return to the US without ANY passport... In fact, every time I returned from Mexico as a kid in the late 80s and 90s, we never even had to show anything. No driver's license, no library card, nothing. The Border Patrol agent would ask "Are you and American citizen? Yes? Welcome back to American soil." Microaggressions against freedom are cumulative.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Well, is marriage a constitutional right? That went all the way to the supreme court and the banning of same sex marriage is unconstitutional. Plenty of things have gone to the supreme court that are not specifically listed in the constitution.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Thanks for the reply. The info you provided is great.

I don't know as that the framers of the USC envisioned 'flying' enough to include it as a 'right'. More like a privilege, like driving than a right. Plus, I would think that as almost all of us can only fly under the auspices of private corporations, under their rules, it may be that they will be the ones who's objections will be considered.

I went and got my passport today! It cost me $160 bucks. I think that's the main reason...revenue generation.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
I don't know as that the framers of the USC envisioned 'flying' enough to include it as a 'right'. More like a privilege, like driving than a right. Plus, I would think that as almost all of us can only fly under the auspices of private corporations, under their rules, it may be that they will be the ones who's objections will be considered.

Wrong . It is the freedom of travel in the US. Doesnt matter if it was a horse drawn cart or a shiny , new alien spacecraft....They did not care of the how. Just the right to travel freely in the US

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Excellent post!

A lot of things changed in this country after that day.

a reply to: olaru12

That would not surprise me in the least.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Unconstitutional how?


If you're driving you should be alright, but flying is different.

Question you don't have to answer;
How does this affect you in the long run?
Or is it just a first world problem?

Passports take time to get and cost a bit of money. Also, I don't see why you should need one to move between states.

a reply to: olaru12

Control poeople, namely people who cant afford a passport. Where is the discriminitory outcry from it? It is also to punish the states who do not accept the Real ID Act. It acts as a passport in the states who complied.