Facts
- State motor vehicle departments collect personal identifying information as a condition of driver licensing and vehicle registration, including names, addresses, phone numbers, Social Security numbers, medical information, and photographs.
- Many states sold or disclosed this information to private parties for revenue.
- Congress enacted the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act of 1994 (DPPA) to restrict disclosure of personal information from motor vehicle records without driver consent, subject to specified exceptions.
- South Carolina law allowed disclosure to any requester who completed a form identifying the requester and stating the information would not be used for telephone solicitation, creating a conflict with the DPPA.
- South Carolina and its attorney general sued, asserting the DPPA violated the Tenth and Eleventh Amendments and principles of federalism.
- The federal district court entered summary judgment for South Carolina and enjoined enforcement of the DPPA against the State and its officers; the Fourth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
- Whether Congress had Commerce Clause authority to regulate the disclosure and resale of personal information contained in state DMV records.
- Whether the DPPA violates the Tenth Amendment by impermissibly “commandeering” state legislative or executive processes.
- Whether regulating a state’s disclosure of its own records amounts to forcing the state to administer a federal regulatory program.
Decision
- The Supreme Court unanimously reversed.
- The Court held the DPPA is a valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause because drivers’ personal information, as sold and used in interstate channels, is an article of commerce.
- The Court held the DPPA does not violate the Tenth Amendment because it does not require a state to enact laws, regulate its citizens on Congress’s behalf, or administer or enforce a federal program against private parties.
- The DPPA permissibly regulates states directly in their capacity as holders and sellers of motor vehicle record information and also regulates private resellers.
Legal Principles
- Congress may regulate the interstate sale and use of personal information from motor vehicle records under the Commerce Clause when the information moves in interstate commerce and is used by interstate actors.
- The anti-commandeering doctrine bars federal laws that compel states to legislate or to administer federal regulatory programs, but it does not bar federal laws that impose substantive restrictions directly on state activities.
- A federal statute that applies to states and private parties and restricts a state’s disclosure of information it holds does not, without more, commandeer state legislative or executive functions.
- Congress may regulate a state as a market participant (such as a seller or discloser of data) without requiring the state to implement a federal program.
Conclusion
The Court upheld the DPPA as a constitutional Commerce Clause regulation that directly restricts state and private disclosure of DMV personal data and does not commandeer state governments in violation of the Tenth Amendment.