Does the BMV have a database that can verify if you are in-status or not, or you provide the documents to them... like a valid passport, I-94, I-20 etc...
Can they enquire on these documents to verify if they are valid?
BUT he asked about RENEW exisiting drivers license which he got when he was on valid visa.. NOT about new drivers license.. so from this what I know he is going there and have to show old one.. which is still valid.. they didn't inform him that his drivers license was suspended or so.. he has to show it to blond lady and ask for renew.. or even applay by internet.. some states have this option.. I think there shouldn't be a problem for him then to renew drivers license which he got legall...
BUT he asked about RENEW exisiting drivers license which he got when he was on valid visa.. NOT about new drivers license.. so from this what I know he is going there and have to show old one.. which is still valid.. they didn't inform him that his drivers license was suspended or so.. he has to show it to blond lady and ask for renew.. or even applay by internet.. some states have this option.. I think there shouldn't be a problem for him then to renew drivers license which he got legall...
If you are not a US Citizen then most states will check your status each time you come up for renewal (they don't just do it the first time you applied - it's done each time).
******* applicants who are renewing or amending an ******* Driver License, Permit, or ID Card must surrender the License, Permit, or ID Card and verbally verify the Social Security Number on the BMV record. If the License, Permit or ID Card has the correct address, no other Proof of ******* Residency is required. If the applicant's address has changed, one (1) Proof of ******** Residency document must be presented. Applicants presenting a License, Permit or ID Card that has expired more than ten (10) years ago must provide documentation as if applying for a new License or Permit.
=======================
Welcome to the convenient and easy to use, ******** Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) **************. Applicants renewing an ******* Driver License or ******* Identification Card may be eligible to use the **************** if they possess a card similar to the format on the left AND:
The License is not suspended;
Further testing is not required;
There are fewer than 6 points on the license;
The Applicant is no earlier than 6 months before the expiration date;
An ******* BMV License Branch issued your last License or Identification Card.
The License's last change or renewal was after July 1, 1999.
so from that what they say U just have to have valid Drivers License.. and You have to know Your SS#.
According to the AILA, the House passed H.R. 10 yesterday with very negative anti-immigration amendments including the following:
* Broad expansion of expedited removal
* Burdensome requirement for asylum eligibility
* Prohibition on acceptance of consular identifications
* Restrictions on driver's license issuance to noncitizens
* Various negative provisions on removal of aliens and removal (deportation) proceedings.
Anybody surprised? The anti-immigration forces have seized the opportunity to turn the Statute of Liberty around from "welcome-tired-hands" sign into a country of "immigrants-not-welcome" sign using the issue of terrorism. Out of the anti-immigration issues, only a small fraction of the issues are indeed related to the fight on terrorism, and the recent acts of the government to restrict immigrants and to intensify immigration enforcement have no bearing on the terrorism. These acts are taken mostly for the political purposes and to dance to the tune of anti-immigration lyrics in the country which has been composed and fiercely drummed up by the anti-immigration forces. One questions where they were when the government officials failed to enforce the immigration laws. One questions whether rows of government officials should have faced disciplinary actions for their failure to enforce the laws. Why the difference between then and now? The issue has nothing to do with the terrorism. It is an issue of the government's failure to do the job which the Congress and the Constitution mandated. Why such act was O.K. in the past and why such act is not O.K. now? Should't all government officals, particularly, the Congress men and women, be punished for having committed such negligence and politically liable to their master, the "people?" It is indeed ridiculous and ludicrous that the legislative mandate for the government permits the same act as acceptable and not acceptable depending on who and when it is judged. That's not the "rule of law" which the civilized nations have most cherished in the human history. They should feel ashamed of themselves. Even "Geishas" in Japan live on certain rule of coduct and do not dance on lyrics unless it complies with the code of conduct!
Comment