Jul 01 2026

Did California’s DMV Director lie to the legislature?

California DMV Director Steve Gordon with other DMV staff at witness table facing members and staff of Senate Budget Subcommittee #5

California DMV Director Steve Gordon responds to questions from members of Senate Budget Subcommittee #5 on Transportation, March 19, 2026

As part of their lobbying of the California legislature to change state law and appropriate $55 million to upload information about all California driver’s licenses and ID state-issued non-driver ID cards to the privately-held SPEXS national ID database, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and the office of Governor Gavin Newsom have claimed that the state is already “committed” to the planned upload, despite the fact that it would violate current state law restricting disclosure of license and ID records.

The latest responses to our public records requests show that this claim is false.

At a hearing on March 19, 2026, before Senate Budget Subcommittee $5 on Transportation, DMV Director Steve Gordon  testified (see video beginning at 1:42:00):

As I mentioned, you know, California has signed an agreement back in 2028 to effectuate, you know, the REAL ID Act and make sure that in fact, that we’re compliant, including State-to-State. So the agreement we have with the Department of Homeland Security, as well as the Transportation Security Administration, is we have a agreed upon date, which is the February [2027] date that you mentioned.

If the DMV Director, the Governor, or some other state official signed such an agreement purporting to commit the state to take actions prohibited by current state law, that raises important questions as to whether they violated their duty to comply with state laws, or whether they took it upon themselves to commit the legislature to change those laws.

After subsequent meetings in which the DMV and the Governor’s office doubled down on their claim that the state is already bound by signed “agreements” with the DHS and TSA, we filed public records requests with the DMV and the Governor’s office to find out who signed those agreements, when, and what the agreements say.

The response from the DMV and the Governor’s office was that they could find no record of any such agreements.

In our public records request, we cited DMV Director Gordon’s testimony and asked for:

…a copy of each agreement referred to by Director Gordon in this testimony, including the names, titles, and organizational or agency affiliations of each of the persons signing the agreement…. This request includes… the agreement(s) signed in 2018 and the agreement(s) that the state of California and/or the DMV currently has with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and/or Transportation Security Administration regarding the “State-To-State” system, the date of participation by the state of California and/or the DMV in that system, or the February 2027 date referred to by Director
Gordon.

The Office of the Governor told us that it “has no records responsive to your request.” The DMV, after three weeks of delay, told us that it could find no contracts or agreements at all with the TSA, and that the only contracts or agreements with the DHS that it could find were a series of annual contracts for the DMV to pay the DHS per-query fees to use the DHS/USCIS Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system to check the citizenship and immigration status of applicants for California driver’s licenses and IDs. The DMV could find no contracts or agreements with the DHS related to the “State-to-State” system.

Assuming these responses to our request for public records to be accurate, there is no agreement form 2018 or more recently with the DHS or TSA committing California to participate in the S2S network or upload any information to the SPEXS database at AAMVA’s central site for S2S, much less any agreement committing the state ot a February 2027 “deadline” for this upload — contrary to DMV Director Gordon’s testimony.

This isn’t a new question or the first time that DMV Director Gordon appears to have lied about REAL-ID Act requirements. In our testimony as the only public witness at a state budget hearing in 2019, we pointed out (see video beginning at 1:10:23) that that the DMV was already making plans that would require this upload, but hadn’t sought funding or authorization from the legislature for it. We also raised many of the other issues that have re-emerged this year when the DMV belatedly sought approval and funding for the upload.

Following that 2019 hearing, DMV Director Gordon admitted to us that he had personally flown without ID and knew that no ID at all is required to fly, despite his personal appearances in DMV videos and “public service announcements” claiming that ID was required and that REAL-ID would be required to fly.

Neither California legislators nor the public should trust the DMV on this issue, especially when the DMV’s Director makes specific claims in official testimony — naming specific parties, dates, and details — of which the DMV can find no record.

As we said at this Monday’s hearing before the full Senate Budget Committee (see video starting at 2:48:22) once the DMV uploads information about all California driver’s licenses and IDs to AAMVA (which holds the SPEXS database), the “guardrails” in this bill would do nothing to protect Californians against the threat that Federal or other states’ law enforcement agencies could obtain an order (1) requiring AAMVA to hand over this data in bulk and (2) prohibiting AAMVA form disclosing that order to the DMV or to the Californians — especially vulnerable immigrant and transgender Californians — against whom this data will be weaponized.

This is a major policy question that shouldn’t be be bundled into the budget. There’s no urgency and no legal deadline — only a date picked by AAMVA for AAMVA’s convenience. There’s no reason not to remove this proposal form this year’s budget and budget trailer bill so that  it can be given full and deliberate consideration by the appropriate policy committees of the legislature.

There’s an alternative: As we’ve been telling the DMV and the legislature for years, instread of premature capitulation to DHS threats, California should be  working through its Attorney General to prepare to defend Californians against any attempt by the DHS and/or TSA to carry out their lawless threats to interfere with state residents’ right to travel if the state chooses not to comply with the REAL-ID Act.

Jun 27 2026

California legislature agrees to upload driver’s licenses to national database

Withdrawing its opposition under behind-the-scenes pressure from Gov. Gavin Newsom and lawless threats from the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the California legislature has agreed to fund and revise state law to authorize the upload of information about all driver’s licenses and ID cards issued by the state to the private SPEXS national ID database operated by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA).

The budget compromise between Gov. Newsom and the legislature announced last night includes “guardrails” intended to give an illusion of protection for license and ID data.

There’s no time before the hearing on the budget compromise scheduled for Monday morning in the Senate Budget Committee for legislators to assess whether those guardrails will be effective. But to anyone aware of the real threat, it’s apparent that they are a sham.

That was inevitable, as we’ve pointed out in our previous statements to the legislature.

Once this data is transferred to AAMVA, components of the DHS or other Federal or state law enforcement agencies will be able to obtain it from AAMVA by court order. Such a subpoena or warrant could, and probably would, include a gag order prohibiting AAMVA from disclosing it to the state of California or to the individuals whose data is disclosed.

Even after the fact, neither California nor individual Californians will know that this has happened or be able to challenge it.

That data could be misused in many ways, but it’s especially likely be weaponized against  immigrant and transgende Californians who are already being targeted by Federal agencies and other states.

The summary of the proposed transportation budget trailer bill (AB 169) released last night says that it “Limits data sharing to only that required by federal law.” But that’s not true. “Compliance” with the REAL-ID by California or any other state is optional, not required. Neither the Federal REAL-ID Act nor any other Federal law requires, or could require, California or any other state to share any data with AAMVA, a private nonprofit corporation.

As we pointed out in our earlier testimony on the budget proposal,  California has a choice. The state could and should say “No” to premature capitulation to DHS threats.

The Legislature should reject this “compromise” sell-out. Instead, the state, through its Attorney General, could and should prepare to defend Californians against any interference by the DHS or Transportation Security Administration (TSA) with our right to travel.

Jun 24 2026

Arizona governor vetoes bill to end REAL-ID compliance

Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs has vetoed  a bill which would have ended the state’s compliance with the Federal REAL-ID Act.

Like many other states, Arizona gives applicants for driver’s licenses or non-driver IDs two options: a “travel ID” that is issued in accordance with procedures that satisfy the requirements of the REAL-ID Act, or a non-compliant “non-travel” license or ID that is valid for driving or other state purposes but isn’t valid for Federal purposes.

HB2957 would have required the Arizona Department of Transportation to continue to offer this option of driver’s license and IDs that don’t comply with the REAL-ID Act. HB2957 would have added the requirement that information about these noncompliant licenses and IDs and the Arizona residents who choose them not be shared with other states and not be “stored in any interstate, federal or international database system, including the state pointer exchange services” (SPEXS), the national ID database hosted by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA).

Since 2024, Arizona has been sharing the contents of its database of both “travel” and “non-travel” licenses and IDs with other states, and has uploaded excerpts from each  license of either type — compliant or noncompliant — to the SPEXS national ID database.

The point of HB2957 is to end this practice. People who choose a non-compliant license or ID think they have opted out of the national data sharing and national ID database that is the goal of the REAL-ID Act. To make that opt out real, HB2957 would have required Arizona to discontinue uploads of data about noncompliant “non-travel” Arizona licenses and IDs to SPEXS.

But AAMVA requires a state that wants to participate in SPEXS  to upload data about all licenses and IDS the state has issued, regardless of whether they are issued in accordance with REAL-ID Act procedures.

Even if AAMVA — a private nonprofit corporation not subject to any of the decision-making rules applicable to state or Federal government agencies —  decided to change its rules, allowing state residents to opt out of national sharing of their license data would render all licenses issued by that state noncompliant with the REAL-ID Act.

The REAL-ID Act requires that, “To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall… Provide electronic access to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State [and] maintain a State motor vehicle database that contains, at a minimum… all data fields printed on drivers’ licenses and identification cards issued by the State.”

If a state withholds data about some licenses and IDs from this data sharing, that state won’t be in compliance with the REAL-ID Act. And for a license or ID to be “compliant”, it must both be (1) issued in accordance with compliant [procedures and (2) issued by a compliant sate. If the state as a whole is noncompliant, none of the licenses or IDs it issues will be compliant, regardless of what issuance procedures are followed.

HB2957 was approved by both chambers of the Arizona legislature by substantial majorities, but not by the 2/3 vote required to override a veto.

Gov. Hobbs’ veto letter says only that the bill “fails to strengthen required federal identification-verification safeguards that keep our state safe.” There’s no indication of how Gov. Hobbs thinks a private national ID database keeps anyone safe.

Gov. Hobbs is a Democrat, and the majority of members of both chambers of the Arizona legislature  are Republicans. This isn’t a partisan issue, though. Next door to Arizona, in California, a Democratic-majority legislature is fighting the Democratic governor to keep Californians’ data out of the SPEXS database.

HB2957 is likely to be reintroduced in the Arizona legislature next year.

Jun 15 2026

California legislature removes REAL-ID compliance from Governor’s budget

The California Senate and Assembly have removed funding and legislative changes to upload drivers license data to the private SPEXS national ID database from Governor Gavin Newsom’s proposed budget.

This isn’t the final decision. The legislature has to pass its version of a budget by June 15th, but the final budget and associated legislative changes may not be enacted until sometime in August, after negotiations between the legislature and the Governor’s office. But as

Some state legislators are still trying to find ways to put “guardrails” on California license and ID data that will protect it even after it is uploaded to  the national database. But the more carefully they study the problem, the more they realize that nothing the state could do would prevent this data from being obtained by Federal or out-of-state law enforcement agencies, without the knowledge of the DMV or the Californians against whom it could be weaponized, once it is uploaded to AAMVA, an out-of-state nongovernmental entity.

This is too important a decision to bury in the budget as an afterthought.

There’s no rush. The DMV’s target date for the upload was set by AAMVA, for its convenience, not by Federal or state law. Removing this from the budget and abandoning postponing any approval until next year (if this ill-considered plan by the DMV and the Governor isn’t abandoned), will give time to consider the implications and the alternatives.

Instead of preemptively capitulating to legally dubious Federal threats to harass California air travelers if the state doesn’t comply with the REAL-ID Act, the Governor should call the Feds bluff, stand up to the DHS, task the state’s Attorney General with preparing to defend Californians against any interference with our right to travel.

May 26 2026

Reasons for California not to comply with the REAL-ID Act

The budget committees of the California legislature are continuing to consider a proposal from Governor Newsom and the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to appropriate $55 million and, more importantly, change California law to permit the DMV to upload information about all licensed California drivers to the SPEXS national ID database.

We’re in Sacramento this week, along with a statewide coalition of immigrant, LGBTQ, and other human rights groups, talking to legislators about what’s wrong with this proposal:

(download this 1-page summary)

“State-to-State Verification System (S2S) Project” – OPPOSE

  • If California chooses to comply with the REAL-ID Act, the DMV will be required to make all data in DMV records about all California driver’s licenses available to all other states (and to the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, AAMVA). The REAL-ID Act provides that, “To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall… Provide electronic access to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State [and] maintain a State motor vehicle database that contains, at a minimum… all data fields printed on drivers’ licenses and identification cards issued by the State.”
  • DMV data will be available to other states through the S2S network. It will also be uploaded to the SPEXS national ID database at AAMVA’s central site.
  • Other states can make only limited queries through the S2S network. But AAMVA as the holder of the SPEXS database can query and retrieve data in bulk at its central site.
  • If the DMV doesn’t have a Social Security Number on file for a license, it will upload a record for that license to the SPEXS database with “99999” in the field for SSN.
  • AAMVA could search for and retrieve all records with “99999” in the field for SSN, or could be ordered to do so by a Federal or state warrant, subpoena, or other court order.
  • A demand to AAMVA for SPEXS data could and probably would include a gag order prohibiting AAMVA from telling the California DMV or the affected individuals that AAMVA had been required to retrieve and disclose their information.
  • No provision in a contract between the DMV and AAMVA could override a gag order. California might not know about or be able to challenge a court order to AAMVA.
  • Contractual “guardrails” would give only false and misleading reassurance, not real protection. The only way to prevent Federal agencies or other states from (secretly) obtaining data from AAMVA is for California not to upload that data to AAMVA.
  • AAMVA is a private Virginia corporation not subject to any of the public records, open meetings, or privacy laws that would apply to a Federal or state government agency.
  • AAMVA has no procedure for an individual to find out what information about them is in the SPEXS database or with whom AAMVA has shared any or all of that data.
  • The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has threatened to interfere with Californians’ right to travel if California doesn’t choose to comply with the REAL-ID Act. But the promises made to California drivers and the protection of Californians’ personal information should take precedence over the convenience of air travelers who don’t want to get a passport or passport card.
  • Instead of capitulating to unlawful or questionable DHS threats, California could and should challenge those threats, just as California has challenged other DHS threats.
  • The “deadline” cited by the DMV was set by AAMVA, not by any law or regulation. There is no need to rush a decision which, once made, would be irrevocable.
May 22 2026

Minnesota OK’s “open” meetings behind TSA checkpoint

The Minnesota Commissioner of Administration  has issued a formal advisory opinion that it doesn’t violate the state’s open meeting law for the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) to hold its meetings in location behind a TSA checkpoint and accessible only by showing REAL-ID or paying a $45 fee, as long as the MAC offers to pay (or reimburse) the fee for those seeking to attend MAC meetings.

The advisory opinion addressed only the following question:

Does the Metropolitan Airports Commission Board of Commissioners policy requiring attendees to pay for TSA ConfirmID or obtain a Real ID or passport to attend meetings violate Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.01 to hold open meetings?

The advisory opinion only addresses the requirement to pay the fee or show REAL-ID. This leaves unresolved an issue on which we requested an opinion, but which the Commissioner declined to address: Whether Minnesota’s open meeting law permits the MAC or another state body to hold meetings in a location to which access is under the control and subject to the standardless discretion of the TSA or another third party. The TSA claims the right to deny passage to anyone, regardless of whether they show REAL-ID, pay the illegal $45 fee, or respond to the TSA’s unlawful questioning.

May 21 2026

Immigrant and human rights groups call for California not to upload driver’s license data to national ID database

Before a hearing last week before the California Assembly Budget Subcommittee #4 on Transportation, a coalition of 170 immigrant and human rights groups and allied organizations submitted a joint letter opposing the plan to upload data about all holders of California driver’s licenses and state-issued IDs to the SPEXS national ID database.

The joint letter and testimony by some of the witnesses at the hearing called on legislators to reject the proposal by Governor Newsom and the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to appropriate $55 million and amend California’s driver’s license privacy law to allow the upload, which would be prohibited by current state law.

Alliance San Diego and other groups have also launched a petition campaign for individuals to tell Governon Newsom, “Do Not Comply” with the REAL-ID Act.

In testimony and a Powerpoint presentation for the hearing, witnesses from the DMV led by Director Steve Gordon doubled down on claims also made by Governor Newsom’s office that are partly misleading and partly false.

The DMV witnesses stressed that other states accessing the SPEXS database at AAMVA’s central site through the  S2S network will be able to send and receive answers to only a limited set of queries, and won’t be able to perform bulk searches such as for all the SPEXS records from California with “99999” in place of a Social Security number.

But the DMV avoided mentioning that AAMVA, as the owner of the SPEXS database, could perform this or any other sort of bulk search and retrieval of SPEXS data — or could be ordered to do so by  Federal or state law enforcement agencies or courts.

The DMV also said in its Powerpoint and testimony that, “AAMVA must notify CA if non-participants [such as federal agencies] request data.” This isn’t true.

The contract with AAMVA signed by the DMV on March 30, 2026 provides that AAMVA will notfy the California DMV of such a demand “if legally permitted”. A legal order to AAMVA to search for, retrieve, and hand over some or all of the information in the SPEXS database could and probably would be accompanied by a gag order prohibiting AAMVA from disclosing the order to  California authorities, the individuals whose data was retrieved and revealed, or anyone else.

As we’ve noted before, California authorities cannot truthfully promise that AAMVA will be allowed to notify them of a demand for SPEXS data, or that they will even have an opportunity to contest such a demand. Once this data is uploaded to AAMVA — a private out-of-state entity — this data will be out of the state’s control.

Some witnesses at the hearing called for “guardrails” to be included in the California law to protect sensitive data uploaded to SPEXS, such as the “9999” placeholder that flags  records of drivers who were unable to provide the DMV with a Social Security number.

But in reality, no such guardrails are possible. Nothing in California law or a contract between AAMVA and the DMV could override AAMVA’s duty, as a private Virginia corporation, to comply with orders from Federal courts or courts in Virginia or other states.

“Guardrails” in the law authorizing the upload to SPEXS would be a sham: They would offer only a misleading and falsely reassuring illusion of protection for Californians’ privacy

Senate Budget Subcommittee Chair Steve Bennett (D-Ventura) acknowledged explicitly that whether to capitulate to Federal threats to harass Californians boarding airline flights, if the state doesn’t comply with the REAL-ID Act, presents a choice between “inconvenience” to air travelers and much more severe potential negative consequences for immigrants  or others who might be targeted based on SPEXS data.

That should be any easy choice. Protection of vulnerable Californians, especially immigrants, against Federal weaponization of their personal information should take precedence over the convenience of air travelers. California should not comply with the REAL-ID Act. Instead, the state should stand up to lawless Federal threats and prepare to defend Californians against any interference with their right to travel.

The DMV witnesses at last week’s hearing weren’t asked, and didn’t explain, why they signed a contract with AAMVA to upload data to an out-of-state private entity in a manner prohibited by current California law, without waiting to see whether the legislature would amend the law to permit this upload.

The DMV also avoided mentioning that the February 2027 “deadline” for the upload of California data to SPEXS was set solely by AAMVA and isn’t based on any provision of Federal law or regulations. There’s no need for California to do anything this year, especially on a rushed schedule that buries this major policy change in the budget bill.

The Assembly Budget Subcommittee heard testimony but deferred any decision on the proposal The next hearing on this proposal come as soon as next Thursday, May 28, in Senate Budget Subcommittee 5 on Transportation.

Apr 29 2026

Uploading California driver’s license data to the SPEXS national ID database

of CalMatters (syndicated statewide) on plans by the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to upload information about all California driver’s licenses and state IDs to the SPEXS national ID database run by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA).

If you’re looking for background, here are some of our previous reports on this issue:

The Washington Examiner reports receiving a statement from a spoksperson for California Governor Gavin Newsom, “CalMatters got it wrong – their reporting hurts vulnerable Californians by manufacturing fear and panic with lies.”

In a statement posted on Bluesky, Gov. Newsom’s office says that, “Federal immigration  agencies have NO access” to data uploaded to SPEXS, and that “the system does NOT include immigration status and cannot be searched that way.”

These claims by the Governor’s office are false. Federal immigration or other law enforcement agencies CAN access SPEXS data with a warrant or subpoena to AAMVA, the same way they could obtain data held by any other private entity. That order to AAMVA could include a gag order so California wouldn’t know or be able to challenge it. A simple search for SPEXS records with the placeholder “99999”  in the field for the last five digits of the Social Security Number CAN retrieve all records of licenses issued to individuals who were unable to provide a Social Security Number.

What part of this do the Governor or his lawyers not understand or not believe?

We stand by our statements to CalMatters and the accuracy of their reporting.

The Governor and the DMV are proposing that the state capitulate preemptively to lawless threats by Federal authorities to harass and discriminate California residents when they travel by air. That’s a choice not to challenge those lawless Federal threats, as the state has challenged many other recent lawless Federal threats. That’s also a choice to prioritize the convenience of air travelers over the protection of immigrant Californians. If they want to make those choices, they need to make them openly and be willing to defend them.

The upload to SPEXS of data about all California licenses and IDs would break the promises made by the state and the DMV that information in driver’s license records wouldn’t be made available for immigration enforcement or other unrelated purposes. Those promises  are codified in current California law, which would prohibit the planned upload to SPEXS.

AAMVA as a private entity requires (although neither Federal nor state law requires) that if a state chooses to upload information about its residents to SPEXS, it must include either the last five digits of the Social Secuirty Number for each license holder, or “99999” as a placeholder for each license holder without an SSN. This makes licenses issued pursuant to immigrants and other individuals without SSNs, pursuant to California AB-60 and similar laws in other states, immediately identifiable in the SPEXS database.

As we pointed out in our interview with CalMatters, the Governor’s office and the DMV must have known that once data about California licenses and IDs is uploaded to SPEXS, immigration or other law enforcement agencies will be able to obtain that data from AAMVA. A warrant or subpoena could contain a gag order prohibiting AAMVA from telling California or the impacted individuals that their data has been handed over by AAMVA.

California authorities cannot truthfully promise that AAMVA will be allowed to notify them of a demand for SPEXS data, or that they will even have an opportunity to contest such a  demand. Once it’s  uploaded to AAMVA — a private entity — it’s out of the state’s control.

There’s no way to know whether AAMVA has already been required to secretly hand over any or all of the data already uploaded to SPEXS by other states.

The Governor’s proposed budget contains funding for the upload and is accompanied by a  “budget trailer bill” that would amend state law to allow the upload.

Our previous report mentions a separate bill, AB-2156, which had been introduced on this subject. AB-2156  was repurposed by amending it to substitute unrelated legislation for a new and unrelated purpose. This is a procedural tactic used in the California legislature to more rapidly advance an urgent measure for a new purpose after the deadlines for introducing new bills. The result is that AB-2156 won’t serve the original purpose.

The only bills that will be considered will be the budget bill (funding the SPEXS upload) and a “budget trailer” bill containing legislative changes needed to allow the projects funded in the budget, including amending state law — which in its current form would prohibit the SPEXS upload — to allow the SPEXS upload. This policy change will be bundled into the budget trailer bill, rather than given full and separate consideration.

Apr 06 2026

Is a meeting “public” if you have to show REAL-ID or pay a fee?

At our request, the Minnesota Commissioner of Administration has directed the state’s Data Practices Office (DPO) to issue an advisory opinion as to whether the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) violates the state’s Open Meeting Law by holding its meetings in an area at the MSP airport accessible only by passing through a TSA checkpoint, which requires either REAL-ID compliant ID, a passport, or paying a $45 fee.

The Commissioner has complete discretion to decide when to issue an advisory opinion. We are pleased that they have decided to do so in this case. We thank the DPO for their (unsuccessful buy helpful) efforts at informal mediation with the MAC, which preceded our request for a formal advisory opinion.

So far as we know, this will be the first official review by any state or local government body, under any state or local open meeting law, of whether a meeting of a government body can be considered “public” or “open” if REAL-ID or a fee is required for entry.

As stated in the Commissioner’s notice of the preparation of an advisory opinion, under Minnesota law, “Although the advisory opinion will not be binding on the Board, a court must give the opinion deference.”

We look forward to the Commissioner’s opinion. According to the notice , “Section 13.072 requires the Commissioner to issue an opinion within 50 days of receipt of the request. Therefore, the Commissioner must issue the opinion by May 21, 2026.”

Mar 15 2026

DMV wants to upload California drivers license data to the national REAL-ID database

The California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) has requested more than $55 million in additional funding for costs related to uploading information about every California drivers license or state-issued ID card to the national REAL-ID database, SPEXS.

The DMV Budget Change Proposal is accompanied by a “trailer bill” and a “policy” bill, AB-2156, introduced in February on an “urgency” basis to take effect as soon as enacted, that would override the provisions of California motor vehicle and privacy law that currently prohibit this upload.

[Update: AB-2156 will no longer serve this purpose. See details in comments below.]

Both the budget and policy proposals have the support of the DMV and Governor Newsom. It will be up to members of the state legislature — and public pressure — to stop them before they are enacted into state law and have to be challenged in court.

These budget and policy proposals will need to go through both the Assembly and Senate Budget and Transportation committees. The first hearing on the budget proposal is expected to be this Thursday, March 19th, in the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, Subcommittee 5 on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor and Transportation. The first hearing on the policy bill is tentatively expected to be April 15th in the Assembly Committee on Transportation.

The DMV is asking for $32M in fiscal year 2026-2027 and $23M in 2027-2028 for what it describes as a “State-to-State Verification System (S2S) Project”:

The Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) requests additional funding and personnel resources to continue DMV’s compliance with the REAL ID Act of 2005 by implementing the State to State (S2S) Program. California’s compliance date for State to State (S2S) is February 16, 2027, and the core DMV systems will interface and connect the driver license (DL)/identification card (ID) S2S data elements with the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) electronic verification and history exchange.

This summary is in parts inaccurate, in parts misleading, and in parts incomplete.

Inaccurate, because California is not in compliance with the REAL-ID Act and, as the proposal is written, this project would not bring the state into compliance.

Misleading, because it doesn’t mention the SPEXS national ID database that is central to this system; characterizes as a “state-to-state” system what is actually a hub-and-spoke network in which data is shared between states and AAMVA, not directly between states;  and downplays the role of AAMVA from the owner and controller of the database to the mere operator of an “exchange”.

Incomplete, because it doesn’t explain that the “compliance date” it refers to was set by AAMVA (and could be changed or eliminated by AAMVA), not by any law; says nothing about the status of AAMVA as a private, non-governmental, out-of-state organization not subject to any of the open meetings, public records, due process, privacy, etc. laws that would apply to a Federal or state government agency; and doesn’t consider whether the proposals violate the state constitution.

The policy bill, AB-2156, has similar defects in addition to internal contradictions. These suggest that the drafters of the legislation didn’t fully understand what it would mean, why it’s so much worse than it appears, or that they have a real choice about whether to keep chasing the moving goalposts of Federal demands for REAL-ID “compliance”.

Read More