examiner.com: Florida Gubernatorial candidate challenging facial recognition DL records

examiner.com: Florida Gubernatorial candidate shows up in court by Adrian Wyllie. He’s challenging the REAL ID Act of 2005 which requires facial recognition imagery:

Libertarian Party of Florida Gubernatorial candidate Adrian Wyllie was in court yesterday morning, June 4, 2014, fighting for all Floridians to travel in the state without giving up their Fourth Amendment rights. Wyllie pleaded “not guilty” in his case for driving without a license which he had voluntarily surrendered in 2011, rather than renewing it, which would have forced him to comply with the REAL ID Act of 2005. Wyllie’s next step is to go to trial in the case after pleading “not guilty” at yesterday’s hearing.

. . .The candidate has publicly chosen to take a stand against the unconstitutional law which results in everyone’s face being biometrically scanned and going into a federal database. Wyllie contends this is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, Wyllie feels the First Amendment is being violated by threatening and enacting arrests of citizens for traveling the public roadways. He said yesterday morning, “We’re forced to waive our First Amendment rights for the ‘privilege’ of getting a driver’s license.”

The REAL ID Act of 2005 is an attempt to have anyone traveling in America to have Real ID compliant papers in order to board a commercial flight or enter a federal building. The Act was originally marketed in Congress as a way to fight terrorism and illegal immigration, however it has not and will not do either. Its purpose is to create a massive central database of Americans to increase surveillance pinpointing where they are and what they are doing with greater accuracy than existed in 2005. Some states of the Union have refused to comply and yet others are offering their state citizens a choice between drivers licenses’ that are either REAL ID compliant and another version that is not compliant.

This entry was posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.