Lawsuit challenges N.Y. requirement that license applicants present SSN and/or proof of lawful residence

IMMIGRANTS & PUBLIC BENEFITS

Driver's Licenses

Lawsuit challenges N.Y. requirement that license applicants present SSN and/or proof of lawful residence
Immigrants' Rights Update, Vol. 18, No. 6, September 21, 2004

Immigrants are challenging the New York Dept. of Motor Vehicles’ refusal to issue new or renewal driver’s licenses or ID cards to large numbers of actual and potential applicants because of its policy and practice of requiring that applicants present an acceptable Social Security number (SSN) and/or documentation showing that they are lawfully present in the United States.

Some of the lawsuit’s seven immigrant plaintiffs are not eligible to be issued an SSN and so were not permitted to renew their licenses, even when they fulfilled the alternative requirement under state regulations of presenting a letter from the Social Security Administration stating that they are ineligible for an SSN. New York DMV personnel told them that they also had to provide proof of legal immigration status.

One of the plaintiffs, whom the federal government had granted temporary protected status, was denied a learner’s permit because the expiration date of her Dept. of Homeland Security–issued employment authorization document was two days short of six months from the date the learner’s permit would have been issued. Although the EAD was renewable, the DMV apparently required that a document proving the license applicant’s lawful immigration status have an expiration date no earlier than six months from the date the license would be issued.

Another plaintiff, who had been granted asylum in the U.S. and had applied for adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence, was issued a learner’s permit that expired on the same date that his refugee travel document expired. He subsequently was denied a driver’s license because the DMV claimed his visa had expired, despite the fact that the expiration of an asylee’s refugee travel document does not indicate that the asylee’s lawful status has lapsed or been revoked.

The lawsuit’s plaintiffs face extreme hardship and deprivation if they cannot obtain licenses: loss of their livelihoods, as well as difficulties getting their children to school or obtaining food, medical care, and other services. The lawsuit alleges that no statutory authority exists for the DMV requiring that applicants present an SSN or proof of lawful status as a condition for obtaining a driver’s license or ID and that, with respect to this policy, the DMV violated rule-making provisions under state law. They also allege that the state’s failure to give them written notice of actions taken against them or an opportunity to be heard, as well as its failure to promulgate meaningful standards as to what documents are acceptable to support a driver’s license application, violates the due process clauses of both New York’s constitution and the U.S. Constitution.

As the plaintiffs point out, enforcing U.S. immigration law is the responsibility of the federal government, not of a state DMV. Moreover, they assert, denying immigrants licenses is counterproductive to promoting security, since it weakens the state’s ability to track state residents’ whereabouts or to compel them to comply with insurance and other government mandates.

The requirement that applicants for driver’s licenses or state-issued IDs present an SSN did not exist in New York before 1995. That year, the requirement was instituted by statute in order to make it easier to track down parents who fail to pay court-ordered child support. According to DMV-issued regulations implementing the statute, driver’s license and ID card applicants are required to present either an SSN or a letter from the Social Security Administration (SSA) stating that they are ineligible for an SSN.

Beginning in 2003, the DMV began to cross-check SSNs that had been presented by driver’s license applicants against SSN-related information provided by the SSA. According to information cited in the lawsuit, SSNs presented by at least 600,000 license or ID card–holders did not jibe with the SSA’s database. Beginning in Jan. 2004, the DMV began to send “verification letters” to license/ID-holders for whom an SSN-related discrepancy exists. The letter instructs the recipient to verify his or her SSN data with the DMV within 15 days, warning that failure to do so will result in unspecified adverse action, including suspension of the person’s license. The DMV has announced that, as a result of this new policy, it expects to suspend the licenses or ID cards of about 300,000 people in the near future.

The defendants named in the lawsuit are Gov. George Pataki and New York DMV Commissioner Raymond P. Martinez. The plaintiffs, who have asked for a jury trial, seek an injunction stopping the defendants from requiring production of a valid SSN and/or documentation of lawful status. They are represented by Jackson Chin of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund.

Cubas et al. v. Pataki et al., No. 04112371 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., filed Aug. 27, 2004).