SB 1374, titled the “Safe Mobility Act,” makes several changes to Arizona’s driver license and nonoperating identification license laws. The bill adds “consular identification card” to the list of acceptable identifying numbers an applicant may provide in place of a Social Security number or individual taxpayer identification number, and it defines consular identification card as a card meeting standards in another statute. It also updates the definition of highly restricted personal information to include consular identification card numbers, alongside photographs, Social Security numbers, ITINs, and medical or disability information.
The bill revises application and issuance rules for driver licenses and instruction permits to require proof that an applicant’s presence in the United States is authorized under federal law, while also allowing applicants to submit a Social Security number, ITIN, or consular identification card number. It directs the Department of Transportation to verify and retain those numbers, limits disclosure of those numbers, and allows the department to adopt procedures to deny licensing to deported persons and to restore application privileges if legal presence is later restored. The bill also preserves existing options for post office box addresses, veteran markers, Native American markers, and special markings for underage, ignition-interlock-restricted, and emancipated-minor licenses.
SB 1374 changes the content of driver licenses by providing that a person who does not provide a Social Security number must receive a license marked “For driving privileges only. Not valid for identification.” It also extends the validity period of a driver license to eight years for applicants who do not provide a Social Security number, while keeping the existing age-based expiration and renewal rules for most other applicants. The bill does not appear to alter the basic licensing classes or the existing prohibitions on issuing licenses to minors, suspended drivers, or others already barred under current law.
The bill’s impact on state law is primarily to broaden acceptable identity documentation for licensing purposes and to formalize the use of consular identification cards in Arizona motor vehicle records and licensing applications. It would affect the Department of Transportation’s application review, recordkeeping, and disclosure practices, and it would create a clearer pathway for applicants who do not have or do not wish to provide a Social Security number. It also has implications for immigrants, noncitizens, and other residents who rely on consular IDs or ITINs, as well as for privacy protections around highly restricted personal information.
No committee discussion or votes are provided in the materials, so there is no recorded legislative sentiment from hearings or floor action. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears aimed at expanding access to lawful driving credentials while tightening verification of federal lawful presence and limiting data disclosure. Likely points of contention would include immigration-related verification requirements, the use of consular identification cards, and the balance between access to licenses and privacy or enforcement concerns.
SB 1374 would amend Arizona’s driver license and nonoperating identification license statutes to recognize consular identification card numbers as an acceptable identifying number, expand the definition of highly restricted personal information, and require applicants to prove lawful presence in the United States. It would also authorize the Department of Transportation to adopt procedures related to deported applicants, verification of lawful presence, and restoration of application privileges if legal status is restored. In addition, it would create an eight-year license validity period for applicants who do not provide a Social Security number and require a “For driving privileges only. Not valid for identification” marking on licenses issued without a Social Security number.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes are available, so there is no documented public sentiment from legislative debate. The bill’s text suggests a mixed policy posture: it expands access to licensing for people using consular IDs or ITINs, but it also reinforces immigration-status verification and limits the use of certain licenses as identification. That combination suggests the measure could attract support from advocates of mobility and inclusion, while drawing concern from those focused on immigration enforcement or identification security.
The main likely points of contention are the bill’s treatment of consular identification cards, its requirement that applicants prove lawful presence, and its restrictions on disclosure of Social Security numbers, ITINs, and consular ID numbers. Supporters would likely emphasize access to lawful driving privileges, privacy protections, and accommodation of residents without Social Security numbers. Opponents would likely focus on immigration-related concerns, the reliability of consular IDs, and whether the bill could complicate enforcement or identification standards. Because no hearing record is provided, these are inferred policy tensions rather than documented objections.