Posted on 05/04/2009 9:59:46 AM PDT by COUNTrecount
Whether or not you think it's legal is not the issue (and, note that even after this decision, it is most certainly not legal to use a fake SS#, even if you don't know where it comes from). The issue is whether you know (and, thus, whether the government can prove you know) that you are using a number belongs to someone else.
Using a completely fake SS# is a crime, but it is not ID theft. Using a stolen SS# is a crime, but it is not Aggravated ID theft, as defined in the statute unless you know that the number belonged to someone else (rather than simply being fake).
This decision is nothing but the clear application of the explicit language of a duly-enacted statute. To rule the other way (though possibly desirable from an immigration-enforcement perspective: the more tools we have, the better) would be nothing less than judicial activism, which is unacceptable whatever the result.
No, that is not what is happening.
My daughter found out that somebody in the midwest is using her Social Security Number. But evidently, the Social Security Administration KNOWS that it is not her.
The person using my daughter's number is using a different name. They are not attempting to use my daughter's identity. They are attempting to create a completely separate, different identity that uses the same number.
The Supreme Court is simply recognizing that it is two different things. And they are not "taking the word of the defendant". Rather, they are insisting that the burden of proof, even with respect to the intentions of a defendant, rests totally with the prosecution.
The real problem is that the government does not pursue the fraudulent identity crime when it is so widespread. It may someday cost my daughter something and the entire cost is attributable to government toleration of identity fraud and lack of prosecution.
The point of the Supreme Court decision is just that; a person whose intention is to defraud an employer is guilty of fraud, but not necessarily guilty of the specific crime of "identity theft".
It would be similar to having a prosecutor convict somebody of speeding because they double-parked. Both are illegal. But you have to prove the crime charged in order to deserve a conviction.
Thanks for clarifying.
I would like to know if they will punish these people who are using made up ss numbers? :)
I understand the point you are trying to make, just as those that say the “letter” the law was applied, but you are SURELY and SORELY mistaken if you think ID theft did not occur.
You ever have someone file a tax return on your SSN? You ever find out you owe $4500 in taxes AFTER you receive $1200 back from the IRS? You ever try to PROVE to the IRS that you have never worked in Kansas? You then try to PROVE to the state of Kansas that you aren’t going to pay their taxes either? It took three years, 3 YEARS to get the IRS and Kansas off my back about my SSN being used!
Believe me: ID THEFT DID OCCUR!!!
Could someone please explain what happened here? It doesn’t sound right.
Could Obama’s mother using that other woman’s ss number with her own name have done the same thing?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.