WillCAD

Full disclosure: I am not a lawyer, nor do I have any legal training, education, or experience, so the opinions I state in any of my posts are purely an average lay person's opinions.

It's a national ID standard due to three facts:
A. The Real-ID Act mandates everything about issuance of a compliant ID card (including non-driver ID) - what information is collected, what information is retained, how long it's retained, what parts are stored directly on the card electronically, and what parts are printed on the card in human-readable form.
2. The Real-ID Act mandates that all of that information must be shared with all other states through linking of the states' databases.
D. Sharing of driver's information with the federal government is already mandated via an exception to the Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994, (18 U.S.C. § 2721).

The fact that the states are forking over the money, and doing the legwork, in no way negates the fact that they are acting at the behest of the federal government to collect, maintain, and disseminate a far wider dataset on every driver than has ever been collected before. In this case, the state MVAs are performing the same function for the de facto national ID standard that the private company IDEMIA/Identogo performs for PreCheck registration - information collection and identity verification. At the behest of the fed, which makes them federal government actors.

Also, sure, it's possible to board a plane without a Real-ID compliant ID, but not without further violation of your 4th Amendment right to be secure from unreasonable search and seizure, through extensive searches of both your person and your effects. This is un-Constitutional on its face, IMHO, because it's applied unequally - have a Real-ID, no grope; don't have a Real-ID, get groped - and because lack of the special privileged class of documentation is not, IMHO, sufficient justification to use more invasive search methodologies than are used on those who DO have the special document. The search escalation is punitive, not triggered by any legitimate suspicion, and is thus an example of unequal treatment under the law.

This is exactly why the Real-ID requirement for boarding a plane is unjustified.

The freedom concern is not just about being able to identify ones self, it's also about wholesale collection of sensitive PII by the federal government without warrant, probably cause, or reasonable suspicion, with only the vaguest protections on personal privacy. It's also about the ability to track peoples' movements - again without warrant, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion - within the country. And it's about an infringement on the freedom of movement, requiring identity papers for any domestic travel by plane or car (remember, it is legally required in most states, if not all, that a driver's license be on their person any time they operate a motor vehicle).

Warrantless tracking of peoples' movement in their daily personal or business activities is, IMHO, a violation of the 4th Amendment right to be secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects from government intrusion.

Real-ID may be fine for federal installations, but requiring it to board a privately owned aircraft is, IMHO, a way of tracking peoples' movements,and thus a violation of the 4th Amendment. In point of fact, I believe that any ID requirement mandated by the government to board a privately-owned aircraft is such a violation; Real-ID is simply a bigger and dangerouser violation.

Agreed. And not only should the fed have no say in the process, they should also have no access to any data collected by the states for licensing purposes, without a warrant.