new-york-state fourth-amendment
state statute violate 4th
<p>If ny state vehicle statute declares it to be a misdemeanor for failing to update ones home address marked on the drivers license, punishable up to 250 dollar fine and or 15 days imprisonment, after more than 10 days of address change- does it violate the federal 4th amendment against unreasonable search or seizure of one's person. </p>

<p>It seems that to me if it weren't for the fact that one takes physical action to acquire the drivers license it would be in contradiction to the 4th amenent. </p>

<p>So if say this law applied for non drivers license, requiring one to have a valid ID, as well as current address, then this would be in violation, as given no other premises than the existence of a person and no further physical action a person would automatically be in violation and thus in plainest assumptions a person is not protected from seizure. </p>

<p>I understand that though the Constitution is a legal document, it's wording should be able to correctly navigate law given basic reasoning and logical rules that the layman can use. </p>

<p>Since there is no search or seizure involved in having a driver's license, requiring a person to update their address is not a violation of the 4th Amendment. It is also not "testifying against oneself in a criminal case", so it does not violate the 5th. As has been repeated many times, driving is a privilege and not a right, meaning that there is no fundamental constitutional right to drive. Strict scrutiny would not render the requirement to have a license unconstitutional, and it certainly would not invalidate the requirement to give a correct address and update that address as necessary.</p>

<p>There may be issues regarding a requirement to produce identification, but there is no legal precedent for the idea that an ID law law and a federal "must show" statute would violate the 4th (that is not to say that the courts could not <em>find</em> there is such a basis if the question arises, but it has not yet been found). Since there is no national ID law, one can only conjecture what the outcome of judicial review would be, but if such a law survived strict scrutiny, it would be inconceivable that a portion of the law requiring you to keep your address current would fail such scrutiny. A curiosity search would still be barred.</p>
