My wife and I are wondering if she can fly to Dallas to visit with her friend. We are going through the AOS process where we also applied for EAD and travel permission. She has already had her biometrics appointment as well. The thing is that by all appearances, she is in this country illegally. This is even though we have applied for the AOS before her visa has expired.
If she were to go to an airport and be asked to show identification, her visa will show that it is expired. We are wanting to travel to Dallas for her friend's wedding. Is there anything the USCIS can give to show that my wife is here legally while pending approval of the AOS? Or will the airline let her on even with an expired visa? I do not want to drive the 10 hours with a pregnant woman, so the advise about just driving there is not a good option at this point.

Alternatively, does she have a US driver's license that she could show as proof?

Bring your NOA1 from the AOS application to prove that you have filed to adjust status. Shouldn't be a problem.

Jen

You do not need AP to fly domestic. Only need photo ID that matches tickets, like passport. Having NOA1 for I-485 is a good idea, but Customs is not involved with domestic flights.

Your wife is not here illegally. She is in a pending status.

You need to get this clear. She entered legally, married legally, and filed to adjust status. Therefore, she is here Legally.

You can use her passport, a copy of the marriage cert to show any disparity in the names on the tickets and I would carry the 1797c to show that she is in a pending status.

All though, it would be easier for her if she had a state issued ID, her passport will be sufficient. I would check with the Airline to see what types of ID they will accept.

There is NO requirement to show ANY ID to fly domestically. You are simply treated as a SSSS and subject to a secondary screening.

Before I react here.... SSSS?

it was a redundant statement as SSSS refers to Secondary Security Screening Selection.

i have shown ID everytime I fly domestically

SSSS is as described by Lal_Brandow above. Most people do show ID but there is no legal requirement to do so on domestic flights it is more to do with a revenue protection procedure for the airlines. Either way a passport is a valid government ID and the agent could care less about visa validity. On most domestic routes many of the check in staff will never have even dealt with a passport. ORL to DFW should pose no problems.

more importantly, immigration is not involved with domestic flights.

Every time I go through security screening at an airport, aside from almost completely disrobing, I have to present valid picture ID with my boarding pass. I use my driver's license for domestic flights.

Am I missing something?

http://www.papersplease.org/gilmore/facts.html

Yes. The fact that you do this does not mean there is any LEGAL REQUIREMENT for you to do so. Sheeples just go along with the security charade and the farcical behaviour of the organisation called the TSA

This is all great and dandy, back to OP

The passport will do.

Well it is great and dandy if you want a full answer rather a partial one. People with a similar but not identical question may well find this thread on search and its useful to provide full information where at all possible is my take

The passport is not even needed. You can check in online or at a self service kiosk so no ID needed there.

The only person that will ask to see ID is the line checker at a larger airport prior to entering the TSA check. ID is not needed if you are willing to undergo SSSS. The chances of one these McDonalds rejects knowing the first thing about a foreign passport or a visa is virtually none.

A valid passport issued by a foreign government is acceptable ID however not all domestic air travel is free of immigration authority inspections as claimed by an earlier poster. So it is up to the traveller to make sure they are aware of the situation where they are travelling and how to best deal with their own situation.

Oh, please. What's the big deal about showing ID?

I'm much more impressed when someone takes a stand for something important, like world hunger or the lack of potable water in so many areas of the world...

Please don't make snide comments to my husband. The point was made that ID is required and if that ID comes in the form of a passport rather than a US Drivers Licence, so be it and bring the passport.

Annie

The big deal revolves around minor little irritants like, freedom, privacy, and the rights and protections afforded by the constitution. I am sure had the founding fathers been aware of potable water issues they would have included something about it but as it stands I simply chose to deal with the OP question and the misinformation that was given in replies to them. Their issue was ID when travelling I answered that. So far as I am aware an expired visa has no affect on world hunger so I will leave that out of my reply to them.

It was correct information not a snide comment. Your assertion that ID is required is plain and simple wrong information. ID is NOT required. Please post a link to the actual legislation that legally requires you to provide ID in order to travel domestically within the continental USA. Another poster has already provided a link to a court decision that explicitly states that you do NOT have to provide ID but can instead elect to make your self a Secondary security screening selectee. Maybe those darned judges were just being snide

http://www.latimes.com/travel/columnists/l...avel-columnists

this was taken from the Alaska Airlines site...



http://www.alaskaair.com/www2/help/faqs/Tr..._Advisories.asp

this is from the Southwest site...



http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/security_doc.html

TSA Travel Assistant
source



Annie

this is from the Delta site...

''

http://www.delta.com/traveling_checkin/iti...ments/index.jsp

Yet they make no reference to which federal law requires this. Sloppy journalism at its best. Whilst the story confirms tha NO ID is needed they miss the real story here which is that there is a supposedly secretive direction issued by the FAA that passengers must present identification upon initial check-in. Now quite how I provide ID to my lap top when I check In online or to an automated kiosk at an airport I have no idea. This was successfully challenged in Supreme court and the 9th Circuit held that one can either choose to show ID or 'volunteer' for additional screening. That decision stands as of today and the law is therefore quiet clear in that you do NOT need to show ID to fly domestically. To have secret laws imposed without ever knowing what they are seems not only wholly at odds with constitution but a worrying state of affairs the significance of which goes way beyond showing a photo ID.

you might not have to show ID at check-in but I am pretty sure you have to show ID when you got through Security....

Source

Department of Homeland Security - Travel Security and Procedures.

this is from the Air Tran Airways site...



http://www.airtran.com/policies/general_in....aspx?nav_id=19

No you do not. Nor should you.You can simply say I have no idea and go through the war on bottled water secondary screening.

My identity in no ways confirms that I am 'safe" person to fly any more than lack of identity suggests that I am a "threat". The whole thing is a pony show for the public. The only reason ID has ever been required by the airlines is for revenue protection. Government has no place in protecting private companies revenue by enacting legislation. I realize this is going a bit off topic and much deeper than the OP but as his question has been answered and some people are still replying why not

On the subject of the OP how far advanced is the pregnancy/ Airlines do differ as to when they will allow you to fly when pregnant and a bigger obstacle may be the pregnancy than ID. Just a thought - check with the airline if the dates you are travelling on coincides with an advanced state of pregnancy.

Had the founding fathers realized that planes were going to be flown into buildings, that countries would have to protect themselves against terrorism, and that the US would be going to war against it, they might have included a clause about 'verification of identity'.

Much as the idiot Kip Hawley would like to think so posting something on a TSA website does not make it the law

Try reading Gilmore v Gonzales for the up to date position. That case is the current authority on the issue and unless you are saying the current stated case law is not the definitive authority as to what the law actually is then I suggest you waste time googling

The law on this matter is clearly settled for the present. Here is non technical overview
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilmore_v._Gonzales

Judges sided against Gilmore, ruling that people can still travel without identification, provided that the individual in question be placed through more stringent security measures.

And your point is what exactly? We are told that all the players on 9/11 presented valid ID.

You do not appear to have a lot of sympathy in your replies.

Perhaps if you stop and think. The OP was under the impression that his wife was considered illegal, we needed to correct that assumption.

While you are right about the ID, please consider that some people would rather just carry ID to prove their right to remain in this country.

You ARE required by law to carry ID in most states, regardless of the legality of showing it to board a plane. It is also a legal requirement to carry your green card at all times while a LPR.

If you want to prove your right to not have to carry ID to get on a plane, that is fine, go ahead. Personally, that is not a point I need to prove.

LAX states that "passengers 18 years and older require a government issued photo identification to enter passenger security screening." [source]

So in conclusion, you can quote all the case law you want, but when the airlines, the airports, the department of Homeland Security and the Transport Security Administration all say to bring ID with you for air travel, I personally will be bringing ID with me when I fly.

What you do is up to you, and if you don't want to bring ID, go knock yourself out.
Annie

So we are told.

Sympathy something I can live without. I did not read anywhere in his post that he thought his wife was illegal. He did express concern that his wife had no way of showing to a lay person that she was in legal status. That is quite a jump you made there as to the OP.I posted factual information in reply to the OP I didn't enter a popularity contest. State laws with regard to ID or LPR card conditions have no relevance to his question. I am not trying to prove a point I am simply stating factual and correct information pertinent to the OP question. If people choose to try and prove their incorrect replies based on information found on websites as opposed to the law is correct and that the 9th circuit judges wrong then that is fine they can spend all day doing so.

I stated to the OP

1 ID is not required for domestic travel
2 Her passport is an acceptable form of ID should she choose to use it.
3 A more pertinent problem may be how advanced his wife's pregnancy is with regard to air travel than ID concerns.

If people want to argue that any of the above is wrong I am sure he will read their advice in context

.........and your reasons for being so sarcastic to almost everyone in almost every post you make is?

Being that you do not have the ability to see beyond your narrow vision, I do not see any reason to continue this dialog with you.

I wish you the best on your journey

And here was me lost in the illusion that the thread was about ID requirements when travelling domestically within the USA when all along it was about my style of writing, silly me.

I found your answer to be sarcastic, nevertheless welcome to the world of diversity and different styles of writing.

Now if you can tell me how I can convey to people that no matter what they personally do, believe, think or have heard from a friend, bloke in a pub or on faux news and is therefore correct they are plain and simple wrong in legal terms without them going into a google fervour to show me how brilliant they are all then I can lay off the sarcasm a little.

My guess however is that my tongue will be firmly implanted in my cheek for years to come.

Thank you for proving my point

Yet for some reason unbeknown to me you feel compelled to keep replying with personal observations rather than anything of substance in relation to the OP which refutes the answers I have given.

Are you saying that ID is required to fly domestically/
Are you saying that the passport is not acceptable ID should she choose to use it/
Are you saying that an advanced stage of pregnancy would never present a potential difficulty for an intending air passenger.

If not then you agree with me. If you are then please enlighten us all as to why the above 3 statements are factually correct.

You have certainly managed to prove A point to the impartial casual reader, but I am not convinced it is the one you intended

I can think of some recent posts where you don't observe you own "preaching"...

I believe you have me confused with someone else.

I do not recall confirming or denial of any of those issues.

Before you respond, if you respond. I believe you should clarify those for US Citizens vs. non-US Citizens. I think you will find a disparity between the two.

Exactly following your post



I replied with



Your meaningful response was


You failed to address any of those point at all. Instead you provided a rather condescending lecture about what I should be considering. I am perfectly able to form my own opinion as to what I need to consider but thanks for the helpful advice. You then went on to make incorrect statements of fact regarding ID requirements in general again not anything to do with the topic. Deflecting away from the topic is a common debate tactic.

The post that helped the OP in gaining an answer or question of course has to be




If you want to debate the points I have raised then please do so but an attempt to divert to another topic won't get you that far as I have an annoying tendency to go back to the original question and the answers I gave. You make many assumptions that are generally held truisms but not factual at all.



There is no difference in the Photo ID requirement for citizen/non citizens. The issue the court decided on was the requirement to produce Photo ID in order to fly domestically within the US. That decision applies equally to citizens and non citizens. A requirement to carry a LPR card does not over rule that decision and you may still travel without ID. Do not make the mistake of equating TSA buffons with LEOs they are not.

To paraphrase you in part, before you reply if you reply at all I believe you should read the original posters questions my replies to them and see if there is anything I have said which is factually incorrect. If there is then please let me know if not then perhaps you can find a new master to follow around as to be honest I have no real need of a puppy dog

If you do not like my writing style then do not read my replies. But is that is all you have to offer instead of substantive input you really need to turn the keyboard off and walk away in the fresh air for a while.

Have a great weekend, I am just about to go out for dinner and a nice evening so it may take a while for me to get around to replying to any serious points that are on the topic I responded to

We are all awaiting your return with bated breath. Hopefully we manage to get through the next fews hours without you.

I appreciate the information given here. My concern at going to the airport is that someone might try to put stress on my pregnant wife. She has a state issued driver's licence that expired with her visa. I do not want a security screener try and detain her and risk a miscarriage or premature labor. Thank you for your advise and suggestions!

Well, I hope you don't bite it as you have it firmly implanted in your cheek. IF you can look beyond your own highly sophisticated intelligence to those of us who aren't as educated as you are, MAYBE you could TRY to respond in a less superior tone. There are nicer and more polite ways of delivering information than you have so far shown anyone on here. I don't suppose you could try that?



Why not call the airport with this concern? Explain to whomever you speak with that your wife is pregnant and you are concerned with the screening process. Ask what ID she will need and then, if there are problems, you will at least have something to back up your responses. Best of luck to you both as you travel.