WASHINGTON - TelAve -- Immigrant truck drivers are suing California, claiming that its action in revoking more than 10,000 commercial driving licenses violates their constitutionally guaranteed rights to due process.

But, although their attorneys make this argument that claim has no merit, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who has taught the law of due process for more than 40 years.

Due process, he notes, requires that persons who are going to be deprived of liberty or property are entitled to some procedural protections - such as the right to present evidence - in a hearing.

But, notes the law professor, this applies only if the basis for the deprivation is an alleged individual fact; in other words, a fact specific to one individual as to which there can be some reasonable doubt which requires evidence to fairly evaluate.

More on TelAve News

• Japan's Patented "Hammock'n" Smartphone Band Targets Hand Fatigue From Long Phone Use
• Reditus Group Introduces A New Empirical Model for Early-Stage B2B Growth
• CCHR: Harvard Review Exposes Institutional Corruption in Global Mental Health
• New Book: Customer loyalty is dead – telcos have been chasing a ghost
• Goatimus Launches Dynamic Context: AI Prompt Engineering Gets Smarter

In other words, due process doesn't apply when a deprivation is based upon a simple, clear, and unambiguous classification.

For example, if a state wants to revoke the commercial driver license of Joe Smith because he has allegedly been at fault in a dozen truck accidents in the past years, due process applies, and he must be accorded a hearing at which he can try to prove that he was not at fault, that the reported accidents involved a different driver with a similar name, etc.

But if a state decides, based upon medical statistics and similar general evidence, that the commercial driver licenses of anyone over 80 should be revoked because their age very substantially increases the risk of accidents, the group of drivers can contest that decision on variety of legal grounds, but not on the basis of due process rights.

Thus each and every one of the dozens or hundreds of elderly drivers who will lose their license are not each entitled to a hearing at which each can challenge the general conclusion about infirmities and the risks of old age.

More on TelAve News

• Global License Exclusive Secured for Emesyl OTC Nausea Relief, Expanding Multi-Product Growth Strategy for Caring Brands, Inc. (N A S D A Q: CABR)
• RNHA Affirms Support for President Trump as Nation Marks Historic Victory for Freedom
• American Laser Study Club Announces 2026 Kumar Patel Prize in Laser Surgery Recipients: Ann Bynum, DDS, and Boaz Man, DVM
• Lineus Medical Completes UK Registration for SafeBreak® Vascular

In other words, due process has no application to revocations based upon general characteristics such as age; or, as in the California case, to status as immigrants.

So while the plaintiffs are correct that "The Vehicle Code sets out basic due process protections before the DMV takes away a driver's license temporarily or permanently, the statutory language applies only when the denial or revocation is based upon alleged facts specific to the driver;

Thus when California decides to revoke licenses under a general rule linking the validity to lawful immigration status - allegedly because "the increasing number of foreign drivers operating large tractor-trailer trucks on U.S. roads is endangering American lives" - it does not raise any due process issues, say the law professor.

http://banzhaf.net/   jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com   @profbanzhaf