The Illinois Story 2011
After a prolonged challenge in Federal Court by several Illinois citizens requesting religious exemption from providing Social Security Numbers (SSN) in exchange for driver's licenses due to their individual convictions not to obtain or use the SSN, the State of Illinois quickly passed a bill to remove the exemption that was incorporated in the Illinois statutes for many years. In a radical move to rescind the long-standing religious freedom, and rather than let a jury decide, a surrogate federal judge, an Illinois insider, was ushered in to cap the litigation regardless of conflict of interest.
Meanwhile, a Springfield lawmaker pushed through a resolution striking the exemption from the Illinois Vehicle Code. The General Assembly vote was near unanimous, including those that had touted reduced government, protection of religious freedom and fiscal responsibility. The latter was truly upsetting to those seeking to keep or restore religious freedoms in Illinois.
Background
In prior years, the Secretary of State would examine an applicant to determine whether s/he had a reasonable religious objection shared by the central belief system in which they held membership. If you were a member of a religious group prohibiting the use of a SSN, you did not have to obtain or use the SSN for identification in order to apply for a drivers license. The problem was that other applicants sharing the exact same religious objection, but not part of any specific religious group, were shut out.
Mefford v. White
The most striking rejection for an exemption of this type came when the Secretary said Kody Sky Mefford's challenge was "beyond the scope of authority of the administrative hearing", although the hearing officer had approved Mefford's drivers license and said "the statute and rule violated the free exercise clause of the first amendment to the United States Constitution." An appeal left the disheartened Mefford without resolution and facing further litigation which he could no longer afford.
The State's response to a Freedom Of Information Act request revealed that there still was no process for screening these religious individuals without corporate affiliation. In order to overcome blatant discrimination, the applicants had to sue the Secretary of State, but several unusual events took place: Rather than include these applicants with the others already exempt, the State decided to disallow all religious objection to using the SSN, accommodating the federal administration's campaign against religious beliefs.
It Never Happened - A Judge's Slight of Hand
To make matters surreal, a federal judge hearing the case for several years was unassigned by the Court Administrator who reprimanded the applicants through their attorney for not obtaining SSNs. A newly appointed federal judge was brought forth from the State of Illinois to objectively examine the 4-year-old complaint against the State of Illinois. To the litigant's chagrin, the new judge would not recognize their repeated application for exemption in accordance with Administrative Rules; an obvious change of game plan to favor the State, which had been denied every Motion to Dismiss by the previous judge since 2007.
Illinois Statute requires that the Secretary give applicants immediate written notice as to why they are rejected, but in every case of application for exemption at a drivers license facility and with consequent denial, no written notice was ever given to the applicants. Technically, because no initiating documentation existed, due to the Secretary's lack of a specific form mentioned in the Administrative Code, the applicants were never recognized as applying for religious exemption at any of the numerous facilities they visited. The applicants were subsequently prevented from seeking further remedy. To request a hearing one must first have a written rejection notice from the Secretary. Denying their standing in court was a tactful means to exclude them from further litigation. It was over. After years of apparent good standing in court, where the applicants overcame every obstacle by the State, they were suddenly cast out with a tenuous argument:
Catch 22
Though they applied for drivers licenses and religious exemptions in person, and thus defined as applicants, with all documentation required for application except for the SSN, they were neither given access to an exception form required by Administrative Rule, nor given rejection documentation required by Illinois Law. Instead the applicants were mailed an official affidavit to sign stating they were members of a central belief organization forbidding use of the SSN, which they were not. They could neither move forward under false testimony, nor could they seek further remedy without the Secretary's official rejection letter.
To understand this paradox in detail read Catch-22 Illinois Style, it's theoretical parallel, Catch-22 Amish Style, and an explanation of what it is, Catch 22.
The Shell Game
When the surrogate federal judge suggested that the State consider accommodating the applicants by a reasonable understanding of the term "faith", and consequently declared that they had no further standing in court, he did not address The Restrictive Affidavit issue. The applicants returned to one of the Secretary's facilities and upon submitting all the required documentation, including The Amended Affidavit, they were told by the facility manager that the law was recently changed and they were sent away. Realizing that the Secretary of State was not complying with the law, as in previous years, the applicant's attorney demanded a written rejection notice from the Secretary of State so they could exhaust all administrative remedy.
This issue is yet to be resolved by a hearing, if granted, to determine whether or not the State intends to acknowledge Illinois citizen's religious freedoms through the State's compliance with the First Amendment.