A post by Pat

The Arkansas legal system was unnecessarily burdened to spend time and money on a preposterous lawsuit. Two of them in fact.

A state worker did his job properly by denying a driver’s license renewal for an illegal immigrant when she could not produce proper ID. The woman, her husband and her son sued. They claimed requiring proof of legal immigration for a driver’s license is unconstitutional.

The Benton County Circuit Court dismissed the lawsuit. However, the reason for dismissal was not that the plaintiffs are here illegally, had a hell of a nerve to pull this kind of crap and will be deported in the morning. It was dismissed on the technical point that the family opted to use pseudonyms in the lawsuit.

It didn’t stop there. The “Does” (John, Jane and Junior) appealed the case to the Arkansas Supreme Court. They claimed they were entitled to use fake names in the lawsuit against the State because they are here illegally. I guess they realized that’s an awkward fact when you’re asserting constitutional rights. The Arkansas Supreme Court Justices didn’t buy it. This case was dismissed too.

Court: Undocumented aliens can’t bring lawsuits anonymously

LITTLE ROCK — Unlawful immigration status is not sufficient reason to allow a plaintiff in a lawsuit to hide behind anonymity, the state Supreme Court ruled today.

The state’s highest court rejected an appeal filed by a family of undocumented aliens who argued that they should have been allowed to proceed with a lawsuit in Benton County under the names John, Jane and Junior Doe.

The family filed the lawsuit against Richard Weiss, director of the state Department of Finance and Administration, after “Jane Doe” tried to renew her driver’s license and was turned down because she could not produce proof of her lawful immigration status.

The lawsuit alleged that the state law requiring a person to provide proof of lawful immigration status before obtaining an Arkansas driver’s license or identification card is unconstitutional.

A Benton County circuit judge gave the plaintiffs 30 days to identify themselves. They refused, and the judge dismissed the case in July.

JOHN, JANE, & JUNIOR DOE, APPELLANTS, VS. RICHARD WEISS

Appellants, John, Jane, and Junior Doe, appeal the order of the Benton County Circuit Court dismissing their complaint against appellee Richard Weiss, in his capacity as Director of the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration, after they failed to amend their complaint with their real names as the parties in interest. The Does argue on appeal that the circuit court erred by not allowing them to proceed anonymously by the use of pseudonyms.

There is a brief flash of common sense which actually touches on the truly pertinent issue.

I’ve heard – heard your arguments, Mr. Balla, and I can see why people in this situation, illegal immigrants, might – if they had their druthers or their preferences might want to proceed under the radar without their names being known, but – but in a case such as this I fail to see why – why that should be done.

If their allegations [are true,] they’re not able to get a driver’s license and it goes to their qualifications to receive a driver’s license, I think that the State is entitled to know if there is, in fact, a justiciable controversy. How are they – they going to defend an action when they don’t know who it is and when they attempted to get a driver’s license and what their qualifications were or were not at the time they sought to get a driver’s license?

That, as far as I can determine, is the end of the story. It shouldn’t be. There is no mention of any follow up action against John, Jane and Junior Doe. They’re probably still in Arkansas and still driving using whatever names they feel like using today.

All this legalistic laboring for a trifling side issue to the flashing neon lights fact these people are here illegally.

This section is for comments from tammybruce.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
19 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. Kelly says:

    Is anyone else having trouble accessing this link ? I’m prompted for member registration info but hen I click to accept the terms of use and “continue”, nothing happens.

  2. VinceP1974 says:

    The Devil has moved to the blogs from the world of journalism.

    He is here. preventing us from viewing the link

    Feel the chill?

  3. VinceP1974 says:

    All of the comments are being hidden behind “A subscriber” black-out.

    But I could see them on the side bar

  4. thierry says:

    this is showing up on the home page, only accessible by subscription but a page shows up asking me to confirm my subscription even though i am logged in. it further states the content of this post has no subscription that can access it.

    so i can’t access the post when i am logged in either.

  5. Kelly says:

    I cleared history and cache and it didn’t change anything. It seems that thierry and VinceP1974 are experiencing what I am from the replies I can view on the right of the page.

  6. Carol says:

    Is this about someone named John or Jane Doe?

  7. morecowbell says:

    Well this is new. I can’t view the Post or the comments of other TAMS and I am logged in to the blog.. I have tried twice. And you can see that others are having the same problem in the Recent Comments area… Interesting bug. Anyway it’s 10:30 EST, Sat night and if Chris is still working on it, it ain’t working here. Good Luck

  8. thierry says:

    according to legal tradition being the plaintiffs they should have been john, jane, junior roe- such as in “roe vs. wade”. doe was used for defendants. it all comes from old english land law.

    so shouldn’t it be juan, juanita, juanito roe?

  9. VinceP1974 says:

    I was expecting to read

    “.. so they appealled to the United States Supreme Court who ruled that the Executive Branch of Arkansas be imprisoned immeidately. That J. Doe, J. Doe, J. Doe, J. DoeJ. Doe, J. Doe, J. DoeJ. Doe, J. Doe, J. DoeJ. Doe, J. Doe, J. Doe, et al have the human right to apply for and be granted anything they seek.

    Allah is greatest

  10. ChrisL says:

    Shouldn’t the first question be, do they have legal standing in a US court to file this suit? How does one file suit without identifying oneself? The court clerk who processes these cases into the system, should be the first line of filtration. ie – Who are you to bring this suit? I understand that may not be the legal procedure. But why the heck not? That wouldn’t preclude a foreign entity from suing in court, unless they refuse to id themselves. In which case, tough tomales.

  11. IloiloKano says:

    Wonder what country they’re from.

You must be logged in to post a comment.