Is REAL ID really necessary? What authorities are saying
The Department of Homeland Security in May will begin implementing REAL ID requirements for U.S. travelers for the first time, a move that comes as the administration looks to act on some of President Donald Trump's top policy priorities, including its crackdown on illegal immigration and border security.
The enhanced ID requirements are slated to take effect May 7 and will apply to all U.S. travelers over the age of 18.
The law establishing REAL IDs isn't new: Congress first passed the REAL ID Act in 2005 in an effort to crack down on identity verification in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and set "minimum security standards" for state-issued driver's licenses and identification cards.
But after 20 years of slow-walking the law's enforcement, the abrupt timing of the May 7 enforcement is likely to catch many Americans flat-footed.
Just how necessary is obtaining a "REAL ID"? We broke down the changes coming next month and what's at stake for those who don't comply. Here's what you need to know in the final weeks before the new rules take force.
Beginning May 7, all federal agencies, including DHS and TSA, are required to accept only state-issued driver's licenses and state identification cards that comply with the updated identity verification standards.
The goal of the REAL ID Act is "to make state driver's licenses and ID cards (which are identification cards that states issue to non-drivers) more secure, less susceptible to fraud, and more reliable as a form of identification," Magdalena Krajewska, an associate political science professor, wrote in a 2020 article for the Oxford Academic. (The government has for years tried to stand up the REAL ID requirements, most recently in the months before the COVID-19 pandemic.)
The law seeks to add another layer of security to various forms of identification and to make it harder to counterfeit state IDs.
The short answer: It depends. In order to obtain this enhanced form of ID, individuals must present to their local DMV valid proof of identity; proof of their Social Security number and date of birth, and two additional documents that prove they live in the state. This varies from state to state, though updated guidance can be found here.
The good news is that individuals can obtain one of the enhanced IDs at any time. All 50 states, D.C., and five U.S. territories are now issuing REAL ID-compliant driver's licenses and ID cards, according to the DHS.
The REAL ID requirements are a "coordinated effort by the federal government to improve the reliability and accuracy of driver's licenses and identification cards for individuals across the federal government," Bart Johnson, TSA's federal security director for upstate New York, told reporters this month.
Every adult in the U.S., if they want to travel by plane or enter government facilities.
"Every air traveler 18 years of age and older must have a REAL ID-compliant ID, which is a state-issued driver's license, state-issued identification card, or another acceptable form of ID, such as a U.S. passport" before the May 7 deadline, the Transportation Security Administration said in a statement.
Though the other IDs are not rendered obsolete, the TSA said Americans will need to present these new IDs every time they board a commercial flight, even when traveling on a domestic trip. They will also need this updated ID to access federal facilities or be granted access to federal buildings.
No, not everyone needs to get a new ID. In fact, certain states have required REAL ID verification from residents for years, meaning individuals living in those states and with active forms of identification need not hustle to the local DMV.
Enhanced and "REAL ID-compliant" identification cards are marked with a seal, often a star in the top right-hand corner, according to DHS.
The abrupt enforcement timeline could catch many Americans flat-footed, especially ahead of what is predicted to be a busy summer travel season.
While legacy IDs are still valid for travel, including driving, airline passengers who present noncompliant forms of ID before boarding, and without another acceptable alternative, such as a passport, "can expect to face delays, additional screening and the possibility of not being permitted into the security checkpoint," DHS officials said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
33 minutes ago
- Forbes
Travel Ban Reinstated By Trump With Mostly Muslim Countries
President Donald J. Trump, citing national security concerns, has reinstated and expanded the controversial nationality-based travel ban first introduced during his initial term. The new ban, formalized in a Presidential Proclamation that came into effect on Monday, June 9, 2025, suspends the entry of nationals from 19 countries, primarily targeting Muslim-majority and African nations. The proclamation fully suspends immigrant and nonimmigrant visa issuance to nationals of 12 countries: Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. It imposes partial restrictions on B-1/B-2 tourist visas and F, M, and J student and exchange visas for nationals of Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. Exceptions apply to green card holders, dual nationals, certain special immigrant visa holders, athletes in international competitions, and immediate relatives of U.S. citizens. The administration relies on a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which authorizes the president to suspend the entry of any class of noncitizens deemed 'detrimental to the interests of the United States.' That authority was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Trump v. Hawaii (2018), which ruled 5-4 that President Trump's third version of the travel ban was constitutional, emphasizing executive deference on immigration and national security. But critics argue that this expanded ban perpetuates discriminatory intent, noting the disproportionate impact on Muslim and African nations and the invocation of Trump's 2024 campaign pledge to 'restore the travel ban and keep radical Islamic terrorists out.' Stephen Yale-Loehr, a professor of immigration law at Cornell Law School, predicts court challenges but warns that they may fail under the current precedent. 'Even if this expansion is legal, it is not good policy,' he said. 'Families will be separated, and we are not necessarily safer.' The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called the order 'ideologically motivated,' 'unnecessary,' and 'overbroad,' criticizing its chilling effect on lawful travel, academic exchange, and humanitarian reunification. Legal scholars have started to question the constitutionality of this policy. More specifically, they contend that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits governments from denying equal legal protection, while the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment forbids favouring or disfavoring any religion. Critics argue that Trump's policy, which targets specific nations commonly associated with certain religions, risks violating both clauses by enabling discrimination based on nationality and faith. Additionally, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 abolished national origin quotas to prevent such bias. By reinstating restrictions linked to religious or national identity, opponents claim the policy mirrors discriminatory practices that the law aimed to eliminate. Jeremy Robbins, Executive Director of the American Immigration Council, noted: 'Blanket nationality bans have never demonstrated any meaningful national security value. This ban hurts our economy and punishes immigrants who qualify to come legally.' According to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) 'In total, just under 162,000 immigrant visas and temporary work, study, and travel visas were issued in fiscal year 2023 to nationals of the affected countries in the now banned visa categories, according to the Migration Policy Institute.' Nationals from the banned countries represent more than 475 million people globally. Beyond family separations, the ban may deter students, scientists, and health professionals at a time when the U.S. is experiencing labor shortages in STEM and healthcare. Universities like Harvard have expressed alarm at the targeting of international students, as the administration simultaneously suspended new visas for foreign scholars at select institutions, further stoking fears of ideological purges in academia. The 2025 travel ban echoes policies from Trump's first term and extends their scope. The first 'Muslim ban' of 2017 was repeatedly struck down until a more narrowly tailored version survived judicial review. Today's ban, while more procedurally refined, raises the same fundamental concern: are Americans safer by denying entry based on birthplace? Lyndon B. Johnson's signing of the 1965 INA famously stated that 'the harsh injustice of the national origins quota system' would never return. Critics now argue that President Trump has revived that very shadow, using presidential proclamations instead of legislative quotas. 'This is not national security—it's national scapegoating,' said CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad. 'It undermines constitutional values and stigmatizes entire populations for political gain.' The legality of the 2025 travel ban reinstated as it is may pass muster under Trump v. Hawaii, but its morality, logic, and long-term consequences remain in question. As lawsuits mount and civil rights groups prepare their defences, the nation must decide: do we protect ourselves by shutting doors or by standing firm in our values of openness, equality, and due process?
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
ABC News Suspends Terry Moran After He Posts Online Calling Donald Trump's Adviser a 'World-Class Hater'
ABC News made the decision to suspend their correspondent, Terry Moran, after he shared a critical social media post about President Donald Trump's adviser, Stephen Miller "He's a world-class hater. You can see this just by looking at him because you can see that his hatreds are his spiritual nourishment," he wrote in the since-deleted post on X White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt asked ABC "how they plan to hold Terry accountable" just before his suspension was handed downABC News reporter Terry Moran has been suspended from the air after sharing an incendiary social media post about one of President Donald Trump's key advisers. In the early hours of Sunday, June 8, the 65-year-old senior national correspondent took to X to share a post about Stephen Miller, the president's homeland security adviser and deputy chief of staff for policy. Moran referred to both Miller and Trump as "world-class hater[s]" in the post, which has since been deleted. A spokesperson for ABC News commented on the post in a statement shared with PEOPLE, noting that Moran "has been suspended pending further evaluation." 'ABC News stands for objectivity and impartiality in its news coverage and does not condone subjective personal attacks on others. The post does not reflect the views of ABC News and violated our standards," their statement noted. Moran took aim at Miller and the president in the post, which was shared shortly after midnight on Sunday. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. "The thing about Stephen Miller is not that he is the brains behind Trumpism," Moran wrote. "Yes, he is one of the people who conceptualizes the impulses of the Trumpist movement and translates them into police. But that's not what's interesting about Miller." The reporter continued: "It's not brains. It's bile. Miller is a man who is richly endowed with the capacity for hatred. He's a world-class hater. You can see this just by looking at him because you can see that his hatreds are his spiritual nourishment. He eats his hate." "Trump is a world-class hater. But his hatred is only a means to an end, and that end his his own glorification [sic]. That's his spiritual nourishment," he concluded. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt referred to the post as "a rampage against Stephen Miller" in a response on X. "This is unhinged and unacceptable," she wrote, adding, "We have reached out to @ABC to inquire about how they plan to hold Terry accountable." Vice President J.D. Vance also referred to the message as an "absolutely vile smear" in a message on the social media platform. "It's dripping with hatred. Remember that every time you watch ABC's coverage of the Trump administration," Vance wrote. "As it happens, I know Stephen quite well. And he's motivated by love of country. He's motivated by a fear that people like Terry Moran make rules that normal Americans have to follow, but well-connected people don't."Vance wrote, "It's why he fought so hard to get President Trump elected and why he works so hard to implement the agenda." He further commented that the news network "should apologize to Stephen." Moran's post comes a few weeks after he sat down for an exclusive interview with Trump, marking the end of his first 100 days in office since being inaugurated for a second time in January 2025. During the interview, Trump complained that the reporter was "not being very nice" after Moran informed the president that an image of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a legally protected father who was accidentally deported to El Salvador earlier this year, had been photoshopped. 'I picked you because, frankly, I had never heard of you, but that's okay,' Trump said. Another viral moment from the interview came when Moran asked Trump what the Declaration of Independence meant to him. "Well, it means exactly what it says, it's a declaration. A declaration of unity and love and respect, and it means a lot. And it's something very special to our country," the president replied as Moran stared at him with visible confusion on his face. Miller attracted attention in early May during a press briefing about the Department of Education and schools. Trump's advisor took issue with critical race theory, saying that a nation cannot be "successful" if it "teach[es] its children to hate themselves and their country." "Children will be taught to love America. Children will be taught to be patriots," he said. "Children will be taught civic values for schools that want federal taxpayer funding." Read the original article on People
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Corporation for Public Broadcasting can keep board members despite judge's ruling
By Jonathan Stempel (Reuters) -A federal judge said that three board members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting can keep their seats, even as he denied the nonprofit a preliminary injunction to block U.S. President Donald Trump from removing them. In a decision on Sunday, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss in Washington, D.C. said the nonprofit recently used indirect authority it obtained from Congress to protect its independence, by changing its bylaws to make it harder to remove directors at will, including by Trump. "The President is not free to remove directors and then unilaterally to appoint their replacements, thereby using his power to remove as an effective tool for altering board policy," Moss wrote. "Rather, the President's appointment authority is tempered by the requirement that he proceed only with the advice and consent of the Senate." Moss nonetheless said the CPB was unlikely to prevail on the merits, and could not show irreparable harm because it could still function and "in all likelihood" has blocked Trump from exercising unilateral authority to remove board members. Created by Congress in 1967, the CPB provides financial support for the Public Broadcasting Service, National Public Radio and more than 1,500 locally managed public radio and TV stations. It sued after Trump fired three of its five directors -- Diane Kaplan, Laura Ross and Thomas Rothman - ostensibly without providing a reason. PBS and NPR are also suing to block the Trump administration from canceling their federal funding. "We are very pleased that the court recognized CPB is an independent, non-profit corporation, free from governmental control or influence," CPB President Patricia Harrison said in a statement. Harrison said the nonprofit looks forward to continuing its work "to ensure accurate, unbiased and nonpartisan public media is available for all Americans." CPB received $535 million of federal funding for its current fiscal year. The White House and many Republicans have argued that the government should not provide funding to support programming that they consider too liberal. A White House spokesperson on Monday said CPB is "creating media to support a particular political party on the taxpayers' dime. Therefore, the President is exercising his lawful authority to limit funding to NPR and PBS." The case is Corporation for Public Broadcasting et al v Trump et al, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, No. 25-01305.
