Wow, i got so distracted by that treatise,
and hammering mot, that i forgot that the OP was that NCIDP link! i noticed that they're beating this dead horse - STILL...
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCIDP
Federal statute 42 U.S.C. ยง 408(a)(8) unequivocally deems any party that compels disclosure of a Social Security Account Number to be a felon.
The inspector at the DMV office in Elkin, NC, told me the Patriot Act required him to require a SS# from me.
Quoting federal law to that statey - who was compelling ss# disclosure - who was compelled by newer federal law to compel ss# disclosure, was a complete waste of my time.
Seeing this no-ifs-ands-or-buts type language, in this context, makes me wonder if the rubber has met the road for these researchers. Anyone at NCIDP competent to sue a bank for compelling ss# disclosure? How 'bout a state DMV controller, or whatever?
There might be a justiciable controversy, really, and this is the first, or closest thing, i've seen for grounds for a tort, but you won't see me arguing it. Still interesting...
Oh, in case the link goes down, the NCIDP makes a point over there, citing Keeble v. Hickeringill (eegads from the Queen's bench! 1707!) that
Quote:
imposing upon a victim's personhood or livelihood, imposing insecurity upon an individual's sense of personal autonomous self or sense of safety or security, constituted "violent assault".
One might construe the state's requirements for 3rd party documentation of identity as an
Quote:
act of imposing a "mischief" upon an individual that constituted violent assault, not any act of physical impact struck upon an individual (a legally distinct act of battery)
...but the effect of the mischief being distinctly psychological. Please, if you think i related the article poorly, pm me, and i'll edit this. thanks.