You've been allowed to fly without ID (contrary to what you may have heard, even from TSA officers) for some time now -- you don't have to produce photo identification, as much as the airlines would like you to.  (They don't want to make it easy for passengers to freely buy and sell tickets.)  After all, this is putatively still a free country, right?

Flying without ID comes at a small price, though: you get lots of extra security screening.  (Some actually claimed that this sped up their dealings with TSA, as the extra security screening also got them jumped to the head of the line.)  And if you aren't a hardass civil libertarian or are trying to make a point about security theater (after all, how difficult can it be to come by a fake ID?), and have simply mislaid your driver's license, no big deal: submit to the extra screening, and you're on your way. 

Except that, effective today, the TSA is changing their rules.  If you refuse to show ID, they won't let you past the checkpoint:

Beginning Saturday, June 21, 2008 passengers that willfully refuse to provide identification at security checkpoint will be denied access to the secure area of airports.

(The missing comma bugs me almost as much as what I'm about to type next.)

But what's really bizarre about this new policy is what follows:

This change will apply exclusively to individuals that simply refuse to provide any identification or assist transportation security officers in ascertaining their identity.

This new procedure will not affect passengers that may have misplaced, lost or otherwise do not have ID but are cooperative with officers. Cooperative passengers without ID may be subjected to additional screening protocols, including enhanced physical screening, enhanced carry-on and/or checked baggage screening, interviews with behavior detection or law enforcement officers and other measures.

In other words, if you've forgotten your ID, it's still OK.  Take the extra search, and you're still good to go.  But if you're doing this to exercise your Constitutional rights, to protest against regulations you're not allowed to examine (but are nonetheless bound by), or to point out how pointless this entire ID business is at actually increasing passenger safety and security?  You're out of luck.  TSA is being petty and retributive (big shocker there):  if you "cooperate" (meaning: don't give them any static), you'll get to make your plane.  If you don't want to show ID -- even if you cooperate and cheerfully submit to extra screening, just like Grandma in the next lane who left her purse on top of her Buick -- then you don't get to fly.

As Bruce Schneier comments:

[People] who refuse to show ID on principle will not be allowed to fly, but people who claim to have lost their ID will. I feel well-protected against terrorists who can't lie.

I don't think any further proof is needed that the ID requirement has nothing to do with security, and everything to do with control.

Schneier has actually thought extensively about security, something that by all appearances the TSA has not.  (And titling your press release "TSA Announces Enhancements to Airport ID Requirements to Increase Safety" doesn't exactly convince me, Kip: just because you say something doesn't make it efficacious.  Or even true.)

Jim Harper concurs with Schneier, pointing out that "[no] terrorist or criminal would draw attention to him or herself by obstinately refusing an ID check."  Good point.  Didn't all the 9/11 highjackers have valid, legal ID?  And didn't they all successfully clear security screening?  And, more concretely, shouldn't TSA be even more confident that a passenger without ID isn't a threat, given that they've just passed a far more intrusive security screen than the rest of the passengers?  This does nothing to further the TSA's core mission of making transportation systems safer and more secure, but that's no real surprise either.  The TSA, as they almost constantly do, confuses authority with security. 

And I'd agree with Daniel Solove, who points out that this new requirement seems unconstitutional:

This new TSA rule strikes me as problematic from a First Amendment standpoint, since it seems to be designed to target those who don't present ID for expressive reasons. As such, this new TSA requirement might be a form of viewpoint discrimination.  

Although the First Amendment doesn't restrict the TSA from requiring IDs in order to board an airplane, it does restrict using the ID requirement to penalize people who engage in expressive conduct. Because the TSA requirement seems to be targeted to this kind of expressive conduct (hence the exception for lost or stolen IDs), it may run afoul of the First Amendment.

If the TSA were announcing a new rule, one in which everyone absolutely must show ID or not be allowed on an airplane, it would still upset some people (including those that believe in a right to travel freely about one's own country.)  But I'd find it far less troublesome, given that TSA wouldn't be punishing travelers based on what it sees as their intent. The TSA is giving their screeners -- yes, the same ones featuring in travelers' horror stories involving lack of judgment -- the power to decide travelers' intent in flying without ID.  Is this guy making a political statement?  Or did he lose his wallet?  It's entirely up to the screeners' gut instincts.

And, something tells me that if you're not white, or speak with an accent, or have your head covered by a scarf and you've forgotten your ID, then you just might as well go Greyhound, because you won't be flying the friendly skies anytime soon.  (Hey, at least they let you bring bottled water on the bus.)