• Frankly, the entire agency is unconstitutional. From the fact that they basically exist under a general warrant issued by the supreme court (although they invented a new catagory, "administrative search", which doesn't fundamentally change what it is) to the restictions on right The right to assembly requires free travel as well, although the current legal underpinnings are "creative", the 10th admendment which grants all non enumerated powers to the states, to the restrictions on bearing arms on the plane and a half dozen other parts.

    Bush should have _NEVER_ nationalized them, at least as a private entity they existed in a sorta gray area. Now they are clearly violating the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 10th amendments.

    And the solution isn't another bullshit supreme court amendment of the absolutist language in the bill of rights/etc but to actually have a national discussion about how much safety the are providing vs their cost, intrusiveness, etc and actually find enough common ground to amend the constitution. Until then they are unconstitutional and the court makes a mockery of itself and delgitimizes then entire apparatus in any ruling that doesn't tear it down as such.

    And before anyone says "oh thats hard", i'm going to argue no its not, pretty much 100% of the country could agree to amend the 2nd to ban the private ownership of nuclear weapons, there isn't any reason that it shouldn't be possible to get 70% support behind some simple restrictions "aka no guns, detected via a metal detector on public airplanes" passed. But then the agency wouldn't be given free run to do whatever the political appointee of the week feels like. But there are "powers" that are more interested in tracking you, selling worthless scanners, and creating jobs programs for people who enjoy feeling people up and picking through their dirty underwear.

  • It's hilarious how transparent a money grab this entire thing is.

    "You need to show a Real ID for security, otherwise how do we know you won't hijack the plane?"

    "Well I don't have a Real ID."

    "Ok then, give us $45 and you can go through."

    So it was never about security at all then, was it?

    And don't get me started with all the paid express security lanes. Because of course only poor people can weaponize shoes and laptops.

    • Let me just for one second give them the benefit of the doubt.

      Could the $45 be a way to pay for some extra manual screening? Maybe? Or do they not deserve any benefit of the doubt.

    • It may be many things, but I very much doubt the motivation is a money grab. A few people paying $45 isn't lining the pockets of some government official, or plugging a hole in any possible budget.

      Dealing with the presence of travelers who haven't updated their driver's licenses requires a bunch of extra staff to perform the time-consuming additional verifications. The basic idea is for those staff to be paid by the people using them, rather than by taxpayers and air travelers more generally. As well as there being a small deterrent effect.

      • There is no legal requirement to show id or answer any questions to establish identification before flying. In other words there is no extra work required by law which the fee would cover.
        • The TSA is literally doing all this extra work though, whether or not you think it's required by law. They're not just pocketing the $45 and then blindly waving you ahead.
      • $45 x millions of people (some multiple times) = an incredibly consequential amount of money
        • It's not millions of people, most people get Real ID. In the context of airport security budgets, it's not that much. And it's used for hiring the additional staff required and putting together the identity verification systems they use.
          • “Most” people can have it and there’d still be millions (tens of millions, even over 100mill) of people who don’t. Multiple states don’t even require it. That guarantees several million people right there.

            I think New York is one, so well over 10mill people don’t require it. Do you seriously think most of those people are getting one anyway? Guarantee you there are millions of people without it if not tens of millions. I’d put money on it.

            So back to the point, we’re talking likely 100’s of millions of dollars. That is nothing to sneeze at. The TSA is an $11bill operation based on a quick search. $500mill (~11mill people) would be 5% of their annual budget.

            • America only has 340 million people to begin with. Half the population doesn't even fly in a given year to begin with. Those that do are mostly aware of the RealID requirement and either got it whenever they last renewed their driver's license, or renewed early because their DMV kept mailing them warnings about needing to do so if they wanted to fly. Yes, most people who fly either have it, or are getting it before their next flight. Part of the $45 fee is also to incentivize people to get the RealID, as that will obviously be cheaper for them over the long run.

              That's the point. It's not to make money. The primary purpose is to get people to use RealID, and to cover the costs of the extra screening for those who don't. For however much more money they take in, you need to subtract the cost of the additional staff they need to hire and pay to handle it, plus the tech systems.

              Also, remember you can just use a passport instead. That hasn't changed.

        • But everyone would have to take advantage of that benefit not having ID have with themselves.
        • Assuming 100M "classic" ID checks (being generous): congrats, you just paid for two days of running the military!
          • So trump can use this money to invade and finish taking over Greenland!
        • The roughly 7.6 million CLEAR members paying $209/yr grosses them north of $1 billion/year. It's not hard to see why TSA wants to get in on it.
    • My wife, who was on a H1B visa and managed to fly without an ID a few years back. They took her to some side room, asked a bunch of questions and looked her up based on name, DOB, address etc.
    • I am only guessing but I'd be surprised if it was a money grab. My instinct is that it's a way of highlighting RealID citizenship verification.
    • The $45 pays for extra checks and scrutiny.
      • [delayed]
      • What are these checks and scrutiny and how are they applied in the time available? Given the time available is not great ("I'm on the next flight") and the amount of money is modest if humans are involved I'm intrigued to know what could be done that $45 would cover.
        • It's a database lookup that takes 5-15 minutes once you get to an available officer, but then depending on what it returns you may need additional screening, which will also need to wait for someone available.

          That's why if you don't have an ID, you should get to the airport at least an hour earlier than otherwise (already accounting for long security lines), and more during peak travel times. If you get slowed down, you're going to miss your flight. They're not going to speed it up for you.

        • This happened to me once, they just brought out someone (supervisor?) who asked questions about what addresses I've lived at, other similar questions I'd probably only know the answer to.

          It does take longer than regular screening (most of the time was just spent waiting for the supervisor -- I'm not sure they were spending time collecting some data first), if that causes you to miss your flight you miss your flight.

          It seems plausible to me that $45 could be about a TSA employee's wage times how much longer this takes. In aggregate, this (in theory) lets them hire additional staff to make sure normal screening doesn't take longer due to existing staff being tied up in extra verifications.

        • Data brokers already know everything about every American so the TSA is just buying existing information from them. Then they can quickly quiz you on the information to verify that you are you. https://network.id.me/article/what-is-knowledge-based-verifi...
      • what the fuck extra checks and scrutiny could they possibly need? They already go through an x-ray machine and get molested before we get on the plane, "real ID" or not.
      • I'm almost positive they get paid the same at the end of the day either way and the $45 just lines the pockets of someone on the top.
        • It's not that they'd pay individual employees more, it's that they'd hire more workers to account for the fact that their existing workers are tied up doing extra verification.

          Though they might not do that either.

          • Even that fails a sanity test. They're not doing anything more than they would have done 25 years ago when the whole damn thing started.
            • I wasn't flying 25 years ago but I'm not sure what you mean, or how that's relevant actually. The point is just that it takes them more time to do the "extra screening" if you don't have your ID than the standard screening if you did have your ID.
              • Sure. A couple of things to clarify:

                1. They're not doing screening. The screening comes later. At this stage, they're attempting to identify someone. That has never been the job. The job is to prevent guns, knives, swollen batteries, or anything else that could be a safety threat during air travel.

                2. Regardless, the reality is that they do identify travelers. Even so, the job has not changed. If you don't present sufficient identification, they will identify you through other mechanisms. The only thing the new dictate says is that they don't want this document, they want that document.

        • Do you not see how an organization discouraging the use of something inefficient benefits as a whole?

          Thats why cashless businesses exist, why you pay more for things that involve human attention instead of automated online solutions etc.

          • Who does it benefit? Not me. Maybe it benefits Mastercard and Visa.
  • Explain to me how qualified immunity is better than any ill it is supposed to address? And how is it that if you sue the government and win, then the judgement doesn't automatically award reasonable legal fees?
    • Especially when the implication in the article is the police tried to delete a video from evidence -- and still ended up getting to hide behind qualified immunity.

      Ugh.

    • Two separate things. Qualified immunity is just immunity from individual liability afforded to government agents when conducting government business, as long as they are conducting it properly.
  • ggm
    If true, unlikely to help the working poor flying (or attempting to fly) because recourse to courts here is in the realms of the rich or benificent.

    So, Frommers should fund a test case.

    • How many of the “working poor” can afford to fly and don’t have a drivers license?

      All 50 states and 5 US territories issue RealID compliant drivers license/ID

      • Flying domestically is usually cheaper than driving once you get past the range of a tank of gas or two. Also, RealID isn't fully permeated yet - my state won't fully phase out non-RealIDs until 2029.
      • RealID licenses cost extra where I live. Your job can buy you a plane ticket but they can't get you through TSA.
        • > RealID licenses cost extra where I live.

          Where is that? I’m curious.

          Around here, RealID is just what you’re issued when you renew various forms of ID. I don’t even recall an option to get a non-RealID version.

          • I'm in Oregon, and that's the case - about $30 extra. More people than you think don't have access to supplemental documentation required to meet extra requirements – people who don't have current travel documents, people who've just moved into town, people who don't have current documentation of address (e.g. the homeless, people in the foster care system, etc.)

            It's pragmatic to have: plenty of people don't or can't fly, and the cost of supporting this option is marginal.

          • for what its worth, my state made it unpleasant enough that it was easier to just got a non-real id and a renew the ol passport
        • Are you saying our state offers both RealID and none RealID driver’s licenses?
          • California offers both. I renewed my license last year. I opted for a non Real ID version because I could renew online rather than spend hours at the DMV.
          • All states do (for now). Not everyone qualified to drive is capable of proving their identity to the level RealID requires.
          • I know for a fact Kentucky offers both.
        • If your job wants you to fly, it should buy you an id that lets you fly. Have you never applied for a visa to travel on a business trip?
      • > How many of the “working poor” can afford to fly and don’t have a drivers license?

        What he really means is illegals who have fake ids who now can't get RealIDs.

        • Undocumented immigrants can have authentic, non-"RealID" ids, as things such as drivers licenses are the purview of the states, and infringement there upon is an attack on their constitutional sovereignty. California, for example, is perfectly happy to give out drivers licenses to anybody who can establish residency and pass the test, since there's no sense in creating a double jeopardy situation wherein because someone has committed one crime (illegally immigrating to California), they are forced to commit an additional crime (driving without a license). It's the same reason the IRS gives you a spot to declare your bribes and other illegal income.
          • > It's the same reason the IRS gives you a spot to declare your bribes and other illegal income.

            The California example makes sense. They aren't asking a question that would lead to the admission of a crime. The IRS example doesn't make sense, since they are asking a question that would lead to the admission of a crime. Even if the answer was legally protected, a government who does not respect the law (or one that changes the law) could have nasty repercussions.

    • It’s annoying we don’t offer passport cards for free to people as a national government credential. The cost is similar to this fee, and your app and photo could be taken by TSA right at the checkpoint. You head to your flight after identity proofed, and your passport card could then be mailed to you.

      https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/need-pa...

      • It is, but I think that's a separate issue. There's no authorization, let alone a mandate, to prove identity to move about. The mission, ostensibly, is to make air travel safe by ensuring that passengers don't bring dangerous items onto the plane. It's not to track who is going where.
        • I didn't personally experience it (I was too young), but I think that was part of "the mission" since pre-9/11. The point of the ID check is to make sure the boarding ticket and ID match.

          In effect that tracks who is going where.

      • ggm
        You could even double them up as government issued voter-ID and save all that hassle every 4 years. Or the current round of random stop-and-search going on...
        • The people eligible for passports are not the same group of people eligible for voter id since there are a few jurisdictions where non-citizens can vote in certain elections. Voting is also a responsibility of the states (even at the federal level), so there isn't really such thing as a federal voter id since each state has different eligibility requirements for voters that don't necessarily align with passport eligibility. Additionally, passport cards aren't interchangeable with passports in most countries.

          Also, every four years? Elections happen more or less constantly in this country at some level or another. Federal elections are every two years, BTW, and that's if we ignore special elections for federal candidates. You should learn more about the system you live in.

          The current round of stop-and-search would be enabled by making passport cards or some form of universal id. The current legal reality is that you do not need to prove your citizenship on demand if you are already in the US as a citizen. The burden of proof - rightly in my opinion - lies with the government to prove that you are not a citizen. Frankly, I'm quite uncomfortable with "paper's please" entering the US law enforcement repertoire. The fourth amendment was pretty clear about this.

          With the CBP using mere presence validated by facial id only at legally protected protests as reason to withdraw Global Entry enrollment, it seems more and more clear that we do not need to be giving more power to the people who do not understand the 4th and first amendments. Removing people from Global Entry for protected first speech is, afaict, directly in violation of the first amendment even if Global Entry is a "privilege"

        • And also provide an API for online services to use so we are not beholden to Alphabet and Apple.

          And while they’re at it, provide an electronic money account that allows for free and instant transfers.

          But then how would we waste so many societal resources letting investors profit from basic infrastructure?

          • > But then how would we waste so many societal resources letting investors profit from basic infrastructure?

            That, and Millenarian Christians would object to its being a required "mark of the beast." That bit from Revelations has held us back for quite a while.

          • I'm sure some young guns from a techbro company would love to dive into the data lake and make a proposal. They might need to take a few reels of tape away for offsite analysis, but don't worry..
            • The reels of tape already exist at Apple/Alphabet/Tmobile/ATT/Verizon/Meta/Microsoft/Chase/BoA/etc, subject to secret FISA warrants. What difference does it make?
        • "government issued voter-ID"

          Gasp! Checking for IDs while voting is fascist! It's like Germany 1937.

      • While it's not a passport, I believe most states have free id cards that are "realid" compliant.
  • > Requiring ID won’t make us safer, but it enables surveillance and potential control of our movements.
  • You have the right to try and fly without an ID. The airlines also have the right to tell you to buzz off and get lost and the airport operator has the right to decide they don’t want you in the building and trespass you if you don’t scram.
    • You have an absolute "right to travel" (see the 14th amendment and other cases as recently as 1999), but you're also absolutely correct that "common carriers" can can refuse commercial service and you can be criminally trespassed from an airport, BUT TSA can not charge you a fee to attempt to fly.
    • This isn’t like the 1st amendment.

      Public carriers like airlines are not allowed to refuse service for the reason of refusing to show ID.

      They can refuse for other reasons, but the are not “in the loop” when passengers currently get screened by the TSA, which is where RealID is “required”.

      • They very much are in the loop if you get on a plane to fly internationally
    • The airlines are not in charge of airport security. TSA, a government agency, handles that.
  • It's a real head-scratcher that the cohort that claims government ID is unattainable for some people hasn't taken up this issue. "Real ID" isn't something that is just delivered to you. Now we're going to charge money not to have it?
    • Which cohort is that? In my experience, the left has been against requiring internal passports since day one.
    • In my state Real ID is just delivered to you.

      It used to cost $10 for a replacement ID printed in the DMV. Now I pay $25 for a third-party vendor to line their pockets and mail me a new ID weeks later!

      • What REAL ID-compliant document doesn't require an office visit? Also, if you're paying for it, it isn't accessible.
  • > As described by Clinton’s counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, this idea was conceived overnight as a way to show that the government was “doing something” in response to a plane crash that turned out to have been caused by a faulty fuel tank, not terrorism.

    To be honest the worry about terrorists hijacking planes under Clinton proved to be quite prescient only a few years later.

  • In the USA it is possible to fly without an ID?
    • Yes, because the federal government can't assume that everyone has an ID, since they don't issue a universal ID. Any attempt to fix the fact that Americans don't have universal federal identification has met stiff resistance from a variety of angles, from privacy proponents to religious nuts who think universal identification is the mark of the beast.

      It ties into why we still have to register for the draft (despite not having a draft since the 70s, and being no closer to instituting one than any other western country), and why our best form of universal identification (the Social Security card) is a scrap of cardstock with the words "not to be used for identification" written on it.

      So, there's no universal ID, it's illegal to mandate people have ID, and freedom of movement within the United States has been routinely upheld as a core freedom. Thus, no ID required for domestic flights.

    • I had a friend who flew out of SFO without an ID for many years without much issue. It was much more difficult for them to get back.
    • Yes.
    • If you lost your ID while traveling, what would another option be?
  • I hadn't heard about this, but this is blatantly against the explicit and implied "right to travel" that's baked into the 14th amendment and had over a 156 years of precedence since Paul vs. Virginia.
  • Previously:

    US air travelers without REAL IDs will be charged a $45 fee

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46115731

    TSA's New $45 Fee at U.S. Airports Unfairly Punishes Families in the Fine Print

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46138101

    • Yep. It's important to highlight this is not about flying without ID. It's flying without the new federal ID and their attempt to coerce people into getting the federal ID.
      • “New” Real ID is 21yrs old at this point.
        • They've been pushing it back every year because states haven't implemented it uniformly. Washington gave me a non real-ID card in 2022. IIRC the only real-ID option at the time was an Enhanced ID which can be used to cross the border from Canada and costs $100.
          • Washington gave me a non real-ID driver's license in November 2025. I don't plan on upgrading it unless forced to since I also have a passport.
        • As the other comments inform you, many states were not coerced into adopting it until very recently. In these ~dozen states the majority of people do not have the new federal ID. There are Enhanced Driver's Licenses as alternatives the to the invasive federal ID but most just have the normal state ID that work perfectly well; excepting these contrived situations the feds use to try to force people with.
  • It's an interesting argument. Is there a highly-credible, authoritative source? Maybe someone like the EFF or ACLU? There are lots of ideas online about the law, of varying credibility, and I'd hesitate to risk a lawsuit over Internet advice.
    • The author has been qualified as an expert witness in several venues.
    • While I concur with your hesitation, my first reaction on hearing about the fee was "Didn't they say you couldn't fly without a realid? Why am I able to fly without one then?" The idea that they may not be able to bar you without one jives with how this is playing out. Another commenter in this post also mentioned flying without id, which I also thought wasn't possible.
      • If you don't have Real ID they perform an equivalent background check at the airport which they charge you $45 for.
  • 45 dollars? Form 415? Maybe I'm jumping at shadows but this smells like a Trump dogwhistle.
  • I've flown without ID twice. Once because I lost my ID, once to prove to a friend that it could be done. This fee will fail for the same reason that flying without ID works at all - the law is quite clear on it.
    • Did you have to show the airline your ID when checking in?

      As far as I can tell, the TSA is one thing, while airline policy is another.

      The law says it’s not required for security, but airlines might be justified in carrying out their own policies? Honestly curious.

      • My brother did this once and if you print your boarding pass before arriving you don't have to check in (obviously this is for a domestic flight with no checked bags). The TSA will question you and swab everything in your suitcase though.
    • So when TSA asked for your ID, what did you do and what did they then do?
      • You just tell them "Don't have one". Then they (most likely a second TSA agent so you don't hold up the line) run a quick interview to try and establish who the heck you are, and if you can be trusted to be let onto a plane.
  • Where does the fee money go then? Into 45’s pocket?