I know the Full Faith and Credit Clause says that states have to accept my license as valid, but my understanding is that it doesn’t necessarily force, say, Michigan to let me drive around in their state. Ohio can give me a license that says I’m allowed to drive around in Ohio, but if Michigan says that only Michigan residents can use their roads, that doesn’t seem to violate either the FFaC clause nor the Privileges and Immunities clause.
I suspect that there’s some specific part of each states’ motor vehicle laws that allows anyone with a US or international drivers license to drive around, but I can’t seem to find it.
At the federal level, I would assume it has something to do with the interstate commerce clause. Not a lawyer so I don’t know if this is the main reason.
Here is the one for Texas but it also has references that apply to other states and countries. There are a number of agreements that address this issue between states and driving in other countries with an American state issued license. All states have a statute that effectively says that they will acknowledge the legitimacy of any driver’s license granted by any other state at least on a temporary basis.
The term you may looking for is ‘reciprocity’ although that can also apply to agreements about reporting traffic tickets and other traffic related issues to the home state as well.
It even applies to some other countries like Germany with much more strict licensing requirements for their own citizens because of a treaty. You can just exchange an American driver’s license for a German one without going through their normal process in some cases.
In short, there isn’t just one rule that applies to everyone. All states have a statute that addresses the same thing with only minor variations. I do not know what would happen if Michigan decided that it really hated drivers from Ohio and would not let them drive there. My guess is that it would violate the Commerce clause plus a few more things like interstate highway funding considerations so it would be quickly shot down. It has never come up as far as I know.
Michigan passing a law against Ohio drivers cannot violate the commerce clause. Congress might use the commerce clause as justification to pass a law preventing Michigan from doing so, and if they did, then the Michigan law would violate that federal law. I am not aware, however, that Congress has done so, nor that they would be inclined to do so if the issue were to come up.
Laws based on reciprocity work because every participant recognizes the downside of non-compliance. If Michigan restricted drivers from other states, those states would do the same to people with Michigan license, and Michigan residents and voters would consider that intolerable, and do whatever they had to do to restore reciprocity.
Reciprocal driving privileges without undue hindrance are just common sense. The answer to the OP’s question is that each state has agreed to the reciprocity, so the relevant law is within the respective state.
No because that only bans discrimination. If the rule is that all drivers in this state need this states drivers license… there’s no greater hurdle for outsiders to pass… its not discrimination.
Florida kicked itself in the nuts in 2012 when it passed a law preventing foreigners — including thousands of Canadian snowbirds and just plain tourists— without international driver’s licences from driving in that benighted state, thereby setting fire to millions of tourist-trade dollars every year while violating an international treaty.
When, in 2013, the gormless governor found himself on a street corner selling pencils from a tin cup, the law was repealed.
Conversely, an Australian acquaintance found that New Orleans cops would not accept an international driver’s permit, despite a treaty signed by the US (“Oh, I’ve heard of the US, but they don’t have any jurisdiction here”) but was perfectly happy when he showed his Australian permit.
I have a permit from the Swiss Canton of Fribourg that has no expiration date. Presumably it is still valid, although issued 44 years ago.
Also, every state expects that if you move there for a prolonged period of time, you shall get a local license (and very often these days, surrender the old one) after a month or three.
AIUI, the IDP must be presented together with the actual license issued by the home government authority.
Nonresidents, permitted to drive upon the highways of their own states, may operate any motor vehicle upon any highway in this state without examination or license under sections 4507.01 to 4507.39 , inclusive, of the Revised Code, upon condition that such nonresidents may be required at any time or place to prove lawful possession, or their right to operate, such motor vehicle, and to establish proper identity.
Effective Date: 10-01-1953
I always turn to FINK for facts about interstate driving and FFC. Not permitting a non resident to drive in another state would violate the CC, although FINK has to do with window tinting and FFC.
(c) A nonresident who is not less than 16 years of age and who has been licensed either as an operator or a chauffeur under a law requiring the licensing of operators or chauffeurs in his or her home state and who has in his or her immediate possession either a valid operator’s or a valid chauffeur’s license issued to him or her in his or her home state.
The NYS law looks similar to Michigan’s- but watch out for details. You can drive in NY with an out-of-state license but the restrictions on 16-18 year olds apply no matter which state issued the license.
I have just been researching this re: teenage learner’s permits. Reciprocity is common, but not the rule. Some ban drivers under 16, with out-of-stae learner’s permit. Some ban all out-of-stae learner’s permits. Some add a few specific restrictions (which probably apply to their in-state learners as well).
This site was most helpful to me (although I am not from Illinois).
Something else from the Constitution (the original document, not an amendment):
"This Constitution…shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the laws or constitution of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. "
This Does not allow for Louisiana or Florida or any other State to overrule any part of the Constitution.