4 ms·
The author is concerned that the feds could subpoena the data from the company that it's being submitted to. Wouldn't this same concern apply to the feds servin
by giantg2 4mo ago
The author is concerned that the feds could subpoena the data from the company that it's being submitted to. Wouldn't this same concern apply to the feds serving a subpoena to the state? Once the data is out there, it's out there. If one level of government has it, all the peer/higher levels will have access of they want it.
It sounds like this database is the one that feeds license data to NCIC. The bigger question here is if we should be compiling and using data in the NCIC suchbas driver licenses and carry permits.
- iamnothere 4mo agoStates can and do resist federal subpoenas and have more leeway in doing so. They also have enormous legal resources.
- giantg2 4mo agoThis is pretty rare. I find it unlikely the state would fight against basic driver license records released under a subpoena.
- iamnothere 4mo agoIt’s unlikely, yes, but in the context of a battle between the executive branch and a state (over some question of rights) then it’s plausible. Depends on the state, why the information is being requested, and what’s going on in politics. State powers are a check on the federal government (10th Amendment). States need to assert those powers to keep them.
- giantg2 4mo agoThe 10th amendment is practically useless the way courts have interpreted other parts of the constitution.
- iamnothere 4mo agoCan’t win even a single battle if you won’t try to fight.
- halJordan 4mo agoStates fight the federal government all the time. It's practically a primary function of any solicitor/attorney general if only because the federal government of the only other 800lb gorilla in the state
- giantg2 4mo agoI rarely see it in the news. Even when it is there, the feds usually get their way.
- anigbrowl 4mo agoThe author pointed out that one potential problem is feds subpoenaing data from the AAMVA and not notifying the state of California that it had done so. Given it's such a short article, I can't think of a good reason for why you would have overlooked this.
- giantg2 4mo agoI didn't overlook it, it's simply not a relevant point. The state won't do anything about a individual subpoena wether it's against the state or a company.
- anigbrowl 4mo agoThat's not true. the State of California's official position is one of non-compliance with administrative subpoenas, for example: https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/appendix-a-checklist-for-officials-english.pdf https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/appendix-a-checklist-f...
- giantg2 4mo agoThis seems to be only for schools, only for immigration related information, and only for administrative warrants. It's not even non-compliance, it's just kicking it up a level to the superintendent.