Getting your driver’s license revoked for unpaid fees is undoubtedly annoying, but is it actually unconstitutional? A lawsuit against the Virginia DMV is challenging the policy, claiming that it is unfair to those without the ability to pay.

The class action suit alleges that revoking a person’s driver’s license is a violation of the protections in the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Constitution. The defendants accuse the policy of being an “unconstitutional scheme that unfairly punishes them for being poor.” Without a license, a person would legally be unable to drive to work, school, or fulfill other necessary obligations, making the license revocation more than just an inconvenience.

Drivers whose licenses have been suspended or revoked due to unpaid court fines face a $145 reinstatement fee from the Virginia DMV. To put that in some perspective, that would be equivalent to about 20 hours of wages for someone working at Virginia’s minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. While wealthier people would have no problem paying off the fine and getting off scot-free, it could be a financial burden to anyone living paycheck-to-paycheck.

The Legal Aid Justice Center (LAJC), which filed the suit on behalf of the plaintiffs, also recently released a full report on this issue, highlighting the ways in which the state’s repayment plans for unpaid fines hurt lower-income families. The report’s findings indicated that the Virginia DMV does not take into account a person’s financial situation before making the decision to suspend a license.

The plaintiffs in this suit hope to prove that these fines are one of the many injustices that come with being poor in America. People with lower incomes generally find it harder to obtain loans, build and maintain credit scores, and are charged fines for things such as negative bank balances. Court fees and fines also disproportionately affect lower-income people, as they are more likely to go through the court system. Essentially, those with lower incomes are penalized for being poor, while wealthier people are often able to avoid such fees, despite their ability to pay.

LAJC is trying to advocate that the policy be changed to take into account one’s income level before revoking or suspending a license. The suit claims that currently 940,ooo people in the state have suspended licenses due to unpaid fees (over 10 percent of the state’s population of 8.3 million), meaning that a policy change could have a significant impact on Virginia’s citizens.

Mariam Jaffery

Mariam was an Executive Assistant at Law Street Media and a native of Northern Virginia. She has a B.A. in International Affairs with a minor in Business Administration from George Washington University. Contact Mariam at mjaffery@lawstreetmedia.com.

The post Is It Unconstitutional to Take Away Someone’s License for Unpaid Fines? appeared first on Law Street.

Oregon became the first state in the nation to automatically register voters using information collected at the state’s DMV with a law passed on Monday. This law marks another step forward in lowering barriers to voting in Oregon. The state implemented a vote-by-mail system 17 years ago and consistently has one of the highest voting rates among U.S. states.

Under the new law, every voting-eligible citizen who visited the DMV since 2013 will now be sent a ballot at least 20 days prior to an election. Currently only about 73 percent of eligible voters are registered in Oregon, with roughly 800,000 eligible Oregonians not registered. This law will dramatically reduce the number of unregistered citizens, as estimates project that it could lead to the registration of 300,000 people, bringing the total number of registered voters to 2.5 million. Oregon’s current voting system is conducted almost completely by mail; registered voters receive a ballot a couple of weeks before the election that they fill out and return. Under the new law, the number of people that will receive ballots will dramatically increase.

While federal law requires every state to allow registration at the DMV, doing so still requires citizens to opt in. Oregon’s new law will automatically register people and then send them a card allowing them to opt out. All new voters will be registered as unaffiliated with a political party, but will have the option to declare their affiliation at any point. Check out the Oregonian’s Q&A for more information on the specifics of the law.

While registering more people to vote seems like a win for democracy, the law is not without its opponents. The vote on the law split along party lines. Not a single Republican supported the measure, but because Democrats hold the majority, it passed. Opponents made several arguments against the bill including privacy concerns, raised questions about the security of information transfers, and even claimed that it challenges peoples’ freedom.

Let’s first take a look at the argument that automatically registering citizens to vote will in some way restrict freedom, or as Governor Tim Pawlenty put it when he vetoed a similar plan in 2009, “registering to vote should be a voluntary, intentional act.” Registering to vote is not the same as actually voting. The Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey found that in the 2010 midterm elections roughly 65 percent of the population was registered to vote, but only 45.5 percent actually did so.

Simply registering people to vote will not force them to vote, and it may not even lead to a significant increase in voter turnout. However, Oregon has a particularly high voting rate due to its mail-in system, as only three percent of registered voters did not vote in the previous election. That holds true for other states like Colorado, which like Oregon, started sending every voter a ballot before an election and then saw greater participation. Increasing the number of citizens who receive ballots in the mail may actually help increase the United States’ very low turnout rate.

It is clear that simply registering someone to vote will not coerce them to vote, but it helps allow people to participate if they so choose. This could be particularly helpful if someone decides to vote close to election day. Oregon law requires all voters to register at least 21 days before each election, so if you are not registered to vote before that window you are ineligible to participate. However, if someone were already registered through the automatic system then they would be able to vote without previously taking action.

Opponents of the law have also started to question the ability to transfer information securely from the DMV to the county clerk in order to update voter registration records. It is important to note that only voting-related information is transferred, including a person’s name, age, residence, citizenship, and signature, which is what the state’s voter registration card requires. The only truly legitimate concern of the law’s opponents is the fact that voter files become public, meaning that people with proper cause can access basic information about people.

Automatically making this information public may be somewhat concerning, but it is important to note that your personal information is already accessible in many ways. Finally, if people do not want their information public, they still have the option to opt out within 21 days of visiting the DMV by using a card that is automatically mailed to them. Furthermore, the DMV cannot transfer information to the county clerk until after the 21-day window has closed. This means that if someone is genuinely concerned about having a public voter file, he can simply decide not to go through with registration. The only difference here is that the burden will now be on citizens to opt out rather than opt in to registration.

This law will also help prevent voter fraud and ensure that people’s voter files are properly updated in order to prevent them from being disqualified to vote. A registration system that goes through the DMV will require people to actually document their citizenship rather than simply declare it on a registration card, as was previously necessary. Because people’s information will be updated whenever they visit the DMV they will not have to worry about their address being out of date. According to a Pew Charitable Trust project, incorrect information in voter files is a significant problem, as roughly on in eight voter registrations is significantly inaccurate or no longer valid, including over 12 million records that contain incorrect addresses nationwide. Oregon’s new system will help prevent these inaccuracies and will ensure that if people want to vote they will be able to.

Finally, it is important to acknowledge that both political parties have a significant interest in the number of registered voters. Republicans are typically associated with measures to increase voting security, through supporting stricter voter ID laws and opposing easier registration, calling for a crackdown on voter fraud. However, voter fraud is in fact extremely rare and these efforts are likely politically oriented, as they largely benefit from the status quo. On the other hand, Democrats have a lot to gain from increasing turnout because the people who do not vote tend to be Democrats. While there are clear political motivations for both parties, I have to side with those who want to expand voting rights rather than limit them. Oregon’s bill is a win for democracy, and hopefully other states will follow its lead in eliminating the barriers to political participation.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Oregon Becomes First State to Automatically Register Voters appeared first on Law Street.