The Supreme Court today upheld the conviction of Dudley Hiibel. Hiibel was arrested in Nevada when he refused to identify himself to a police officer. He was not arrested or charged with any crime, he simply refused to give an officer his name when asked.
I reviewed the video on Hiibel’s website, and I think he was being a little beligerant, and the officers were there because someone had reported a possible domestic dispute. However, when the police showed up, it was quite clear there was no crime in progress. They could have easily asked his daughter if there was a problem and determined that there was no crime committed without knowing his name. The shame here is that now, essentially, any police officer has the right to ask you to identify yourself for nearly any reason.
Dissenting were Stevens, Breyer, Souter and Ginsburg… better known as the soul of the court.
Update:
Someone asked me today, “What’s the big deal about having to give your name to the cops?” Which, in light of this decision, is a good question. The problem, I believe, is that this decision is a “slippery-slope” which may end in the further erosion of our rights.
For example, the state in this case argued that providing your name is not unreasonable, and that it doesn’t violate your 4th or 5th Amendment rights. (The right to not be unreasonably seached, and your right against incriminating yourself.) The court agreed, stating that it was unlikely that providing your name would be incriminating, but that it would provide the officer with potentially useful information to assess the current situation, for example, did you have a criminal past or a history of domestic violence, etc.
The problem can easily be summed up with this hypothetical: what if the citizen provides a false name? The value of the name provided is then completely negated. The officer can’t determine anything of value, based on a false name. Additionally, the officer has no way of knowning that a false name has been provided unless the officer is also free to request some type of identification. If the officer can’t confirm your identity, the name is useless. But now, there is a justifiable reason for legislatures to pass statutes requiring citizens to produce documentation of identity to law enforcement officers. Chilling, indeed.
Update:
Will Baude has an excellent essay entitled “Bad ID” which reiterates the slippery slope here, and gives some case law backup.