Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
The DPPA regulates the disclosure and resale of personal information contained in the records of state DMVs. State DMVs require drivers and automobile owners to provide personal information as a condition of obtaining a driver's license or registering an automobile. Congress found that many States sell this personal information to individuals and businesses. The DPPA establishes a regulatory scheme that restricts the States' ability to disclose a driver's personal information without the driver's consent. When the Court granted certiorari in this case, the DPPA provided that a DMV could obtain that consent either on a case-by-case basis or could imply consent if the State provided drivers with an opportunity to block disclosure of their personal information when they received or renewed their licenses and drivers did not avail themselves of that opportunity. Public Law 106-69, 113 Stat. 986 changed this 'opt-out' alternative to an 'opt-in' requirement. Under the amended DPPA, States may not imply consent from a driver's failure to take advantage of a state-afforded opportunity to block disclosure. The Act also regulates the resale and redisclosure of drivers' personal information by private persons who have obtained that information from a state DMV. South Carolina (Condon (P)) filed suit. They allege that the DPPA violates the Tenth and Eleventh Amendments to the United States Constitution. The District Court concluded that the Act is incompatible with the principles of federalism inherent in the Constitution's division of power between the States and the Federal Government. The court accordingly granted summary judgment for the State and permanently enjoined the Act's enforcement against the State and its officers. The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed, concluding that the Act violates constitutional principles of federalism. We granted certiorari.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co