NO, You Don't Have To Show Your ID To Cops Without Cause NO, You Don't Have To Show Your ID To Cops Without Cause
By Martin Hill
December 21, 2016


Six years ago, two Texas Troopers threatened to arrest me and impound my vehicle if I did not show them my ID, even though they had no legal basis to ask for it. When I asked him why, one of the troopers replied "I'm the one with the badge and the gun." That same week, I flied state and federal civil rights complaints, and to my shock, the cop's employer actually admitted wrongdoing, in writing no less! The admission letter, dated December 20, 2010, stated that "corrective action was needed" against both officers and that "additional training has been taken." Even better, the agency was then forced to admit in federal court that "The passenger is under no obligation to comply with request" for ID. I actually recorded both these idiots with my cellphone at the very moment they illegally demanded my ID. They were very dumb. :-)

I explained some of this yesterday in my article on the federal government's drowsy driver quiz, but I thought this deserved a more specific explanation of the issue of compulsory ID.

It all started when I was sleeping, in what's called the 'sleeper berth' of a commercial big rig, when my partner got a ticket for an allegedly overweight load at a weigh station in Devine, Texas on I-35.

Who gives a shit, that's his problem, right? That is certainly no reason to wake me up.

You see, the sleeper berth of a commercial vehicle is considered 'sacrosanct,' it would be the equivalent to as if police came to your house banging on your bedroom window at 3AM and demanding that you show them your ID for no reason, under threat of arrest.

That would be totally insane and completely illegal, and most people can comprehend that. This is the same thing.

Furthermore, I was on my federally-mandated ten-hour sleep time

What's that, you ask? You didn't know that the U.S. federal government mandates rules about when certain. people must sleep? Well that's right, they do. As a matter of fact, if a commercial driver violates these rules, it is considered a more serious violation than if they have alcohol in the vehicle. The feds conduct many 'commercial driver sleep studies,' which cost as much as five million dollars per pop. They take this issue very seriously.

To give you a better understanding-- At the time this incident happened, commercial drivers were forbidden by federal law to even literally step out of the sleeper berth into the front seat of the truck for ten hours. If they did so before the 10 hours was up, that would invalidate their ten-hour sleeper time and they would have to start it all over again, before they could start driving for their next shift. This rule was amended a few years ago, and drivers are now 'allowed' to sit in the front seat for a maximum of two out of the ten hours, either before or after an 8-hour sleeper berth time. If a driver is in the front seat for two hours and one second, he is violating federal law.

This may sound like insanity to you, and rightly so, but these are not my rules. I am simply explaining to the general public what the rules are , because most people have never heard of any of this stuff.

At the time this incident occurted, I had just become a truck driver, but I knew enough that cops weren't supposed to do this and that they weren't allowed to just wake people up at their whim.

What happened next applies to everyone, not just truck drivers, because all of us are (supposedly) protected by the 4th Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures by government agents.

It is indeed very important for commercial truck drivers to get their required proper sleep. When you're driving an 80,000 lb. vehicle that's nearly 70 feet long and 14 feet tall on icy roads, or even on sunny dry roads for that matter, it's imperative that you are alert, rested, and have gotten your proper sleep. Any idiot knows this.

So here is the first video, where I ask the woman cop why she woke me up, and I refuse to show her my ID.

"That's fine," is what the first trooper said when I refused to show her my ID. She should've just left it at that, but since her psychotic ego was bruised and she couldn't handle a 'serf' DARING to politely refusing her orders, unbenownst to me she called her boyfriend to come after me. By the way in federal court testimony these two lying goons couldn't even keep their stories straight. One said that she called him on her phone and the other said she came and told him in person. If my refusal was "fine" in her mind, then why the need to call for backup to come after me and threaten me with a gun?

Just as I had arrived back to my truck, the maniac Texas Trooper jumped on the step of my rig and shouted "SHOW ME YOUR ID!"

"I don't even know who you are," I replied, to which he said "I'm the one with the badge and the gun!"

At that point I fumbled with my phone and stared recording him. By the way, in federal court testimony, the male trooper admitted that he said he had a badge and a gun, which at least was an honest admission. You see, that's the good thing about filming all your interactions with cops. He didn't know exactly how much of our exchange I had recorded, so he did not want to lie and deny saying something if it were recorded, so he had to admit it.

Here is a partial transcript of the exchange, and the key point in this case. Note that after the department admitted wrondoing both officers were punished and retrained for this.

The admission letter, dated December 20, 2010 and signed by Captain Kenneth Plunk of the Waco Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Division, stated that "corrective action was needed" against both officers and that "additional training has been taken."

Also, during the discovery phase of the federal lawsuit against the cops, the Texas Dept. of Public Safety was forced to release internal documents where they discussed my case, where the supervisors at TX DPS admitted that "The passenger is under no obligation to comply with request" for ID.

Now, this simple precedent has been to the United States Supreme court dozens of times, so you'd think that cops would know that there is no compulsory ID laws in Texas or in the United States for that matter. Matter of fact, the landmark USSC case on this decision was "Brown v. Texas,' in which a man was arrested for refusing to show ID to police without cause. He was arrested, convicted, appealed, and it went all the way to the USSC, whom struck down the Texas law as unconstitutional.

Here is a partial transcript of my exchange with the trooper. So when the trooper says "when you're in the sleeper, your logbook is off limits, but we damn sure can ID you", and "if you refuse in Texas it's a available offense," he is COMPLETELY full of shit.

Texas State Trooper: So I mean, I don't know how far you want to take it- But in Texas, if you fail to ID, that's a jailable offense.

Driver: Right. that's why I asked her specifically- first of all she wasn't a police officer, so that doesn't even apply- you're different positions right?

Trooper: Right. She's an inspector.

Driver: Right.

Trooper: But, when the federal motor carrier stuff- when you're in the vehicle, and you're being inspected, and- your log book is off limits, I mean, if you're not driving, unless you're sitting up here.

Driver: Right.

Trooper: If you're in the sleeper berth, then sure, we don't have any right to ask for your logbook, but we damn sure can ID you.

Driver: You have a right to wake up the person in the sleeper?

Trooper: Yes we do.

Driver: Oh. Okay. Does she or do you?

Trooper: She does too.

Here are some very expensive Federal Government Commercial driver sleep studies & Hours of Service Rules, paid for with millions of your tax dollars. Here is an extensive list of 4th Amendment protections, regarding law enforcement's demand for ID.

By the way, it's never a good idea to let police 'search' your vehicle without a warrant. There have been many cases where police plant guns and drugs on innocent people. See one particularly egregious case here: POLICE ADMIT PLANTING GUNS AND DRUGS IN CARS, LAUGH ABOUT IT Also, the U.S. Supreme Court Ruled That A Traffic Stop Doesn't Authorize a Vehicle Search.

My friend Kenny Capell refused to show his ID to a maniac Georgia cop and she arrested him, put him in jail, and charged him with 'obstruction of justice.' If convicted, he would have faced a minimum of a year in jail. Kenny refused to show his ID not because he is a criminal, but because the officer had no valid cause to demand it under the state or federal constitution. He beat the charge. [See Man Charged with 'Obstruction of Justice' in Georgia For Refusing Illegal ID Demand Wins, Has Criminal Case Dismissed By Witless Prosecutors.]

The ACLU recently litigated a similar case in Barstow, California, after police there arressted two brothers for not showing ID in a taco place. The phony charges were dropped, cops paid the men $15,000 each, and the Barstow police were forced to post this training bulletin to their officers.

UPDATE 12/20/16 11:14AM Pacific Time: See, this is the kind of stuff I always refer to. The FBI 'Criminal Justice Information Center' just spent 10 minutes reading this page after clicking on it from Hopefully they'll learn something from this, and Mike Rivero's website and radio show! You can view their ISP visitor log data, here.

Featured Articles From

You can find the most recent articles from here.

To get notice of the latest material you can follow LibertyFight on Twitter or contact me to join our e-mail list.

NOTE: The 'DISQUS' feature has been added to this site so you can leave your comments below. No login is required, you can post as a guest.


Front-Row Protester Disrupts Trump's Michigan Speech with "ISRAEL DID 9/11! FIVE JEWS ARRESTED ON 9/11 IN NEW JERSEY, NOT MUSLIMS." Donald Trump Responds To "ISRAEL DID 9/11" Protester With "He's A Trump Guy, He's very committed, Got a lot of energy, He's on our side" (!!!)

Trump's Response To "Israel Did 9/11" Front-Row Heckler Is Almost More Interesting Than The Heckle Itself TV News Footage Of Martin Hill Being Escorted Out By Secret Service While Trump Stops His Speech To Watch & Repeatedly Tells Them "Don't Hurt Him, Be Very Nice..."

HERE IS THE CLOSE-UP VERSION. GO TO MINUTE 20. Trump says that the "Israel Did 9/11' Protester is "A Trump Guy, He's On Our Side, He's Very Committed, he's Got a lot of energy."

Here is the wide-shot footage from the back of the room. If you watch starting at around minute 20, That's when I interrupt him, and he responds to me. Then a few minutes later, he stops his speech again to watch the Secret Service take me out, and he is referring to me when he says: [21:18] Oh! Don't hurt him. Don't hurt him. Be very nice. Be very nice. Yep. Be nice to him. Don't hurt him. See how nice I'm being? I'm only doing it for them, you know that (points to the media) Don't hurt him! (21:34) Tell me, ... I love you too, maam.. Look. Is there more fun than a Trump rally? (21:48) Is there more fun?


Martin Hill is a Catholic paleoconservative and civil rights advocate. His work has been featured in the Los Angeles Daily News, San Gabriel Valley Tribune, The Orange County Register, KNBC4 TV Los Angeles, The Press Enterprise,,,,, Economic Policy Journal,, FreedomsPhoenix, Haaretz, TMZ, Veterans Today, Jonathan Turley blog, The Dr. Katherine Albrecht Show, National Motorists Association,,, WorldNetDaily,,,,, Dr. Kevin Barrett's Truth Jihad radio show,, Pasadena Weekly,, Los Angeles Catholic Lay Mission Newspaper, KFI AM 640,, Redlands Daily Facts,, BlackBoxVoting, The Michael Badnarik Show, The Wayne Madsen Report,,,,, The Contra Costa Times, Pasadena Star News, Silicon Valley Mercury News, Long Beach Press Telegram, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, L.A. Harbor Daily Breeze,,, Whittier Daily News, KCLA FM Hollywood, The Fullerton Observer,, From The Trenches World Report, and many others. Archives can be found at and DontWakeMeUp.Org.

FAIR USE NOTICE: The above may be copyrighted material, and the use of it on may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available on a non-profit basis for educational and discussion purposes only. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 USC S. 107. For more information go to: If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

You can follow on Twitter and re-tweet this article here.
Tweets by @LibertyFight

comments powered by Disqus

Share this page: