Re: Deferred Action

1

I'm sure they figure that their comprehensive public transportation system makes it a minor issue.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 8:25 AM
horizontal rule
2

The OP is important, but also important: what on earth is up with that map? Massachusetts looks like somebody ran it through a sheet press, the borders are randomly varying thicknesses, Colorado and Wyoming are both jauntily non-square, and vermont is getting eaten by New Hampshire.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 8:27 AM
horizontal rule
3

Wyoming does look better with the slight bend on the western edge.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
4

I'm wondering if everyone is going to have to get passports, if more undocumented people get drivers' licenses and the nation is so obsessed with ID when flying. I believe that the Massachusetts licenses, as they now are, will not qualify soon.

Here's some information on Real ID from the Boston Globe

Starting in April, Massachusetts residents will be prevented from using their licenses to gain access to some federal buildings -- unless, of course, state officials give in and quickly adopt the Homeland Security "Real ID" verification program.

If not, residents will be later barred from sensitive locations such as nuclear power plants without showing additional documentation such as a US passport. That will even be the case for visitors seeking a tour of the White House.

Then, as soon as 2016, the punishment will get more serious: Massachusetts residents will be prevented from boarding commercial aircraft if they do not provide another identity document to security screeners.

That's old, and it looks like we got an extension, but it still looks like we'll need other ID to enter Federal buildings in 2016, if we don't take steps to modify our procedures.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
5

2,3: I think the NE corner of New Mexico where it meets Texas and Oklahoma is the most jarring.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 8:49 AM
horizontal rule
6

The combination of Real ID with Voter ID laws is crucial to national security because its keeps terrorists from voting.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 8:55 AM
horizontal rule
7

That's pretty good for a map drawn by a monkey.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 10:07 AM
horizontal rule
8

Massachusetts looks like a deflated shlong.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 10:08 AM
horizontal rule
9

I'm pretty sure Alaska and Hawaii were imported from some other map altogether, one that allowed curved lines.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 10:10 AM
horizontal rule
10

Imagine a perfectly spherical Puerto Rico.

Also, Heebie @ 8 must have encountered some weird schlongs in her time if she thinks that.


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 10:17 AM
horizontal rule
11

I've seen posters of catalogued schlongs, and I've seen rain.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 10:26 AM
horizontal rule
12

We're not doing Real ID here: I don't think there's any talk of an extension, as our former gov told the feds to get fucked. The betting is that they'll still let us on planes.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 10:33 AM
horizontal rule
13

5 -- That's real, though. It's funny they could get that and not understand the 49th parallel.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 10:47 AM
horizontal rule
14

Do you understand why the state of Nebraska was trying to get it into federal court instead of state court? Just to get a better judge or is there some other obvious reason?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 10:49 AM
horizontal rule
15

I believe that the Massachusetts licenses, as they now are, will not qualify soon.
Here's some information on Real ID from the Boston Globe

I swear these stories, about how in 18 months some states' drivers licenses won't be enough to get you onto a plane, have been going around since the Department of Homeland Security was created. Are we sure this isn't a paranoid fantasy like the Trans-Continental Enslavement Highway?


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 10:55 AM
horizontal rule
16

13: All of a 2 mile jog. I chalked up the northern border as being some stylized way of representing the curvature of the parallel.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 11:11 AM
horizontal rule
17

Another complaint about the map: there is a key explaining the meaning of red and green, but most states are neither red nor green, but white. From context I can deduce that there's a middle ground (green states' DMVs don't care about immigration status at all, Nebraska has specifically banned people with the DACA status from getting driver's license, and all other states have some citizenship restrictions but none specifically related to DACA), but it's still pretty bad design to not explain more than half the states in the key.


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 2:48 PM
horizontal rule
18

That's a pretty terrible map from NILC. I'm not even sure 17 is right. I suspect the white states are ones where no one has made any big waves formally, in terms of trying to either overturn OR affirm existing state policy.

That is, in the white states kids with DACA are probably getting driver's licenses, but the state hasn't officially affirmed that they're considered eligible.

This would make sense, because the general idea of deferred action has existed in immigration law for some time, and states would be well within their rights to interpret DACA as just another flavor of the deferred action for which they already have a policy on driver licensing. (See, for example, page 4 of this pdf on PA's policy.)

I don't know why Nebraska would care whether the litigation was in state court rather than federal court. Generally speaking immigration issues are a federal question and thus automatically under the jurisdiction of federal court. But this isn't a case about immigration policy, it's about a state's ability to dictate its own administrative procedure for granting a state benefit (licenses). So I dunno.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 02-24-15 7:10 PM
horizontal rule