I see a lot of stuff lately re proposed programs to allow “undocumented workers” to get drivers licenses, open bank accounts and access a variety of other services.
I’m having a little trouble understanding this. Aren’t “undocumented workers” essentially illegal alines subject to arrest and deportation, or is this not what “undocumented worker” means?
A lot of times both terms could legitimately be applied to the same people.
However, there are two set of legal criteria: authorized to be in the US and authorized to work in the US. For example, you could enter the US illegally but never get a job. Illegal alien but not an undocumented worker. Or, you could enter the US legally under a visa status, such as tourist, that doesn’t authorize you to work. Not illegal, unless you do get a job, in which case you are an undocumented worker and some may also consider you an illegal alien, because you are working without authorization.
I’ll post more later, but one example of people who might be aided by the driver’s license bill are dependents of people here legally on work visas. In Illinois and several other states, they are currently not able to obtain driver’s licenses, because the state requires a Social Security number to issue a driver’s license. But they aren’t eligible for Social Security numbers, because they aren’t authorized to work, even though they are legally present in the U.S.
Also, there are all sorts of quasi-legal statuses where you may not be authorized to work, but may need to open a bank account or whatever. Asylum applicants spring to mind, as do people married to U.S. citizens awaiting processing of their green cards and/or interim employment authorization.
Eva Luna, Immigration Paralegal
Some links on the issue of driver’s licenses for various types of immigrants, from the American Immigration Lawyers Association:
http://www.aila.org/contentViewer.aspx?bc=9,3232,3108,3109&st=driver
“Summary of AILA’s Position
In “front-desk” application practices at motor vehicle offices around the country, an SSN has become increasingly necessary to obtain a driver’s license. Additionally, state legislatures are increasingly requiring the SSN in driver’s licensing. Accordingly, under the proposed change, hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals who are lawfully present in the United States would be unable to obtain a driver’s license simply because they lack work authorization or some other “valid nonwork” reason for enumeration. This presents a severe hardship and also will contribute to an increase in an already high rate of unlicensed drivers and uninsured motorists, which jeopardizes the public safety. These onerous outcomes are not justified by the stated purpose of the regulation—to reduce the misuse of nonwork SSNs for unauthorized employment.
[snip]
The Proposed Rule Imposes A Severe Burden on Foreign Nationals Who, For All Practical Purposes, Need an SSN to Obtain a Driver’s License
Whether intentional or desirable, the SSN has become inextricably intertwined in state driver’s licensing policies and procedures, and the availability of an SSN directly impacts on the ability of millions of foreign nationals to obtain a driver’s license. According to the National Immigration Law Center, as of February 2003, only six states do not require an SSN for driver’s license eligibility1. Although a number of the states requiring an SSN provide some exemptions (e.g., not required if applicant is ineligible to get SSN), four states require the SSN without exception and five more recognize only limited exceptions (e.g., SSN is only required of new applicants). Moreover, state driver’s licensing statutes are in constant flux as to whether an SSN should be required as legislatures struggle to enact national security enhancement measures.
Regardless of whether a state statute actually requires the SSN, many states either require the SSN by regulation or in the clerical “front-desking” application process, which is administered by motor vehicle personnel who often do not appreciate minimum legal requirements. Therefore, by precluding the assignment of an SSN for purposes of obtaining a driver’s license, the proposed rule would effectively deny a license to many individuals who lack work authorization (or some other “valid nonwork reason”), even if they are lawfully present.
For example, the proposed rule would remove the SSN and, hence, the driver’s license from the reach of hundreds of thousands of lawful nonimmigrants, including the dependents of H-1B specialty occupation workers, the dependents of Canadian professionals, F-1 students, and hosts of others who are legally present in the United States but who lack work authorization. This presents an extreme burden for these individuals who are prevented from driving to meet everyday needs and is at odds with an immigration policy incentive that allows familial dependents to accompany a principal nonimmigrant. These persons already must navigate an extremely difficult and unwieldy driver’s license application process that is not equipped to recognize the wide and complex variations on documentation of lawful status. For instance, in many states, such as New York and North Carolina, the dependents of TN Canadians (who enter under NAFTA) and other Canadian nonimmigrants are denied licenses because they do not possess visas, which are not required of Canadians under US immigration law. Thus, to the extent that it impacts on the driver’s license application process, the proposed rule would only exacerbate an already difficult situation for many foreign nationals who are lawfully present in the United States.
AILA recognizes that only a minority of states unequivocally require the SSN. However, it is our clients’ firsthand experience that the SSN is, in practice, a prerequisite to the driver’s license, and too many of our clients have been denied the license simply because they are unable to present an SSN. And, while we applaud SSA’s efforts to work with state motor vehicle administrations and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators to encourage the use of “SSN alternatives” in driver’s licensing schemes, this leaves our clients at the mercy of piecemeal, state-by-state responses to a very real day-to-day problem in obtaining a driver’s license.”
Issue paper on restricting access to driver’s licenses:
http://www.aila.org/fileViewer.aspx?docID=9857
So astro, what are you really asking? Whether there are people in the U.S. who shouldn’t be? We all know the answer to that. Whether everyone who lives in the U.S. should have access to certain basic daily services like banking and driving? If so, that doesn’t sound much like a GQ to me.
You can get a social security number for reasons other than work. It’s just stamped “not valid for employment.”
I got in a big thing with our H/R director as she was taking people’s driver’s licences and said “oh if the SS# is on it that is as good as the card as the state verifies it.” Not true.
There are a lot of reasons to have a SS#. Suppose you have a huge bank account. You need to pay the IRS interest. Granted it would have to be a LOT of money.
The issue comes up after 9/11 it became HARDER to get one but it can be done easily. All you need it 2 documents verifying your AGE, Idenity and legal status in the US.
See the link below. SSA will not issue it SOLEY for a DL but then the person if they can drive in their own country can use their DL here. If a person intends to stay here permenently they should apply, and their VISA would indicate such. And if they are on a tourist or another type they can use their DL from their home country.
So that is not much of an argument.
Not true about being able to drive on a home country license; state laws vary widely on this point. Please read my links. In Illinois, for example, it is only legal to drive on a foreign license for 60 days; many people are here for much longer periods than that before they are eligible for a SS# because of the stage they have reached in the permanent immigration process. (To make a very long story somewhat shorter, most of the time dependents are not eligible to apply for employment authorization until they file their green card applications. Before that happens, they have to pass through other stages of the permanent residence process which can take at least a year in the best-case scenario, and more commonly 3-5 years and up.)
Example: In Illinois, one of my clients was pulled over by the police for speeding and nearly arrested when she told them she had been driving on her U.K. license for over a year, because she had been unable to obtain an Illinois license, because Illinois state law requires an SS# to issue a license, but the SSA would not issue her a SS# because she was not employment-authorized. Luckily she managed to talk her way out of an arrest.
She was legally present in the U.S. as the dependent of a multinational manager on an L-1 work visa. In her case, we resolved the problem by applying for employment authorization for her even though she had no interest in working at the time (she had 3 small kids at home); L-2 dependents are eligible to apply for employment authorization, but dependents of people in most other work visa categories (H-4, O, E) are not eligible for employment authorization until they have received employment authorization in conjunction with a pending green card application, a point which can easily take several years to reach.