Driver License Compact
The Driver License Compact (DLC) is an interstate agreement among 45 U.S. states and the District of Columbia that enables the exchange of information on driver's license suspensions, revocations, and qualifying traffic violations to prevent drivers from circumventing penalties by relocating or obtaining licenses elsewhere.[1][2] Enacted through state legislation, the compact requires participating jurisdictions to report convictions for serious offenses—such as driving under the influence, reckless driving, or habitual traffic violations—to the offender's home state, which then imposes corresponding sanctions like points on the driving record or license restrictions.[3][4] This mechanism enforces the principle of "one driver, one license, one record," promoting uniformity in driver accountability across borders and aiding law enforcement in maintaining road safety by deterring evasion of justice.[2][3] Originating in the mid-1960s with early adopters like Alabama in 1966, the DLC expanded gradually as states legislated participation, reaching its current scope by the late 20th century to address inconsistencies in interstate reciprocity for motor vehicle laws.[5] Non-participating states, including Georgia, Massachusetts, Michigan, Tennessee, and Wisconsin, opt out due to varying policy priorities, such as resource allocation or differing views on processing out-of-state violations, which can result in incomplete data sharing and potential gaps in enforcement.[4][6] While the compact has standardized reporting for offenses like DUIs and thereby reduced license shopping—where drivers seek lenient jurisdictions—it has faced limited scrutiny over administrative burdens on states and the accuracy of reported data, though empirical evidence of systemic failures remains sparse.[1][7] The DLC complements the related Non-Resident Violator Compact, focusing specifically on conviction reporting rather than mere violation notifications, and continues to underpin reciprocal enforcement without federal mandate.[2]Background and Purpose
Definition and Objectives
The Driver License Compact (DLC) is an interstate agreement among participating jurisdictions in the United States, including states, territories, possessions, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, designed to facilitate the exchange of information on driver convictions, license suspensions, revocations, withdrawals, and other licensing data related to motor vehicle operation.[8][2] Under the compact, a driver's home state—the jurisdiction that issued the license and holds authority to suspend or revoke it—receives reports of convictions from other member states where violations occur, enabling consistent enforcement regardless of geographic boundaries.[8] This mechanism applies to offenses such as traffic violations, driving under the influence, reckless driving, and vehicle manslaughter, with convictions defined to include final judgments or bail forfeitures reportable to licensing authorities.[8][2] The primary objectives of the DLC, as articulated in its foundational policy, center on enhancing public safety by linking license validity to demonstrated compliance with motor vehicle laws across all party jurisdictions.[8] Party states recognize that non-compliance with traffic ordinances endangers persons and property, and thus aim to promote adherence to these regulations wherever operators drive, treating violations as indicators of ongoing risk that justify license actions like suspension or revocation.[8] A core goal is to establish equitable reciprocity in license recognition, conditioning issuance or renewal on an individual's overall record of compliance rather than isolated jurisdictional incidents, thereby preventing evasion of penalties through interstate travel.[8] Additional objectives include standardizing information exchange protocols to maintain a single national driver control record per individual, which reduces administrative redundancies and costs while bolstering law enforcement against serious offenses.[2] By integrating systems like the State-to-State Verification Service, effective January 1, 2024, the compact supports uniform driver licensing processes and maximizes the deterrent effect of traffic laws, ensuring that out-of-state violations trigger appropriate home-state responses.[2] These aims collectively prioritize causal accountability for unsafe driving behaviors over fragmented state autonomy in licensing.[8][2]Legal Foundation
The Driver License Compact (DLC) derives its legal authority from the Interstate Compact Clause of Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, which states that "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress...enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State."[9] This provision enables states to cooperate on matters of mutual interest, such as traffic law enforcement, provided the compact does not unduly encroach on federal authority or alter the balance of power among states; congressional consent is required for compacts that potentially do so.[10] The DLC, as an agreement facilitating the exchange of driver conviction and suspension data across state lines, received congressional consent, rendering it a binding interstate compact among participating jurisdictions.[1] Participation in the DLC requires each state or jurisdiction to enact enabling legislation that adopts the compact's uniform text, typically codified in vehicle or transportation statutes.[11] This legislation integrates the compact's nine articles—outlining definitions, reporting obligations for convictions and withdrawals of driving privileges, application procedures, and reciprocity requirements—into state law, making compliance enforceable through domestic legal mechanisms.[12] For instance, states must report out-of-state convictions equivalent to those warranting point assessments or suspensions domestically, with the home state treating foreign violations as if committed locally, subject to enumerated exceptions like non-moving violations.[2] Non-compliance by a member state may trigger compact remedies, such as suspension from information exchange, though enforcement relies on state-level implementation rather than federal oversight.[3] The compact's structure emphasizes reciprocity without creating a supranational entity; it lacks a centralized commission with independent enforcement powers, distinguishing it from more formalized interstate bodies.[1] This decentralized approach aligns with constitutional limits, as states retain sovereignty over licensing while voluntarily ceding uniformity in reporting to enhance public safety and deter evasion of penalties.[2] Amendments to the compact require consensus among members and re-enactment via state laws, ensuring adaptability without unilateral federal intervention.[11]Historical Development
Origins and Adoption
The Driver License Compact originated from efforts to address interstate traffic safety challenges through reciprocal exchange of driver's license information. In 1958, Congress enacted the Beamer Resolution (Public Law 85-684) on August 20, authorizing states to form interstate compacts for highway safety, including the sharing of conviction records and license suspensions to prevent drivers from evading penalties by relocating. This federal consent provided the legal foundation, as interstate compacts require congressional approval under Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution. The compact's formation gained momentum in 1960, when the Western Interstate Committee on Highway Policy and the Western Governors’ Conference passed resolutions advocating for a driver's license agreement to promote uniform enforcement of traffic laws across borders.[11] Nevada adopted the compact first in 1961, establishing it as the initial participating jurisdiction and enabling the exchange of records on serious violations such as driving under the influence and reckless driving.[11] Mississippi followed in 1962, activating the compact's reciprocity provisions, as effective implementation necessitated at least two member states.[11] Adoption accelerated in 1963, with states including Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Washington joining, reflecting regional priorities on reducing highway fatalities through data sharing.[1] By 1966, membership had expanded to 20 states, demonstrating growing recognition of the compact's role in maintaining a single accurate driver record regardless of state boundaries.[11] Early participation focused on Western and Midwestern jurisdictions, driven by practical needs for cross-state enforcement amid increasing interstate travel.Expansion and Amendments
The Driver License Compact underwent steady expansion through state adoptions following its drafting by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in the late 1950s. Nevada became the first state to enact the compact into law in 1961, followed by Mississippi in 1962.[11] By 1963, six additional states—Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, and Washington—had joined, marking early momentum toward broader reciprocity in license suspension and revocation reporting.[1] This initial phase reflected a response to increasing interstate travel and the need for uniform enforcement of traffic violations, with 18 states participating by the end of the 1960s.[1] Adoption accelerated in subsequent decades, reaching 38 states by 1989, driven by legislative recognitions of the compact's role in enhancing highway safety via mandatory reporting of out-of-state convictions for serious offenses like driving under the influence and reckless driving.[1] Notable later entrants included Louisiana in 1968, Illinois in 1970, Maryland in 1987, Massachusetts in 1988, Minnesota in 1989, and Pennsylvania effective January 1, 1995.[1][3] Tennessee's entry in 2020 expanded membership to 45 states plus the District of Columbia, covering the vast majority of U.S. jurisdictions and facilitating the "one driver, one license, one record" principle across nearly all states.[1] Amendments to the compact's core text have been minimal, as it relies on the original articles for information exchange protocols, with evolution occurring primarily through administrative updates by the Driver License Compact Commission rather than wholesale revisions.[2] Procedural manuals have been revised to incorporate technological improvements, such as the 1994 update to the operations manual, which expanded guidance on compliance reporting and data handling.[13] More recently, integration with the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators' State-to-State (S2S) Verification Service took effect on January 1, 2024, enhancing real-time license status checks and conviction data sharing among members.[2] States have also enacted implementing legislation amendments to refine reporting thresholds or align with federal mandates, such as those tied to the National Driver Register, ensuring ongoing adaptability without altering the compact's foundational reciprocity obligations.Membership and Participation
Participating Jurisdictions
As of January 1, 2024, the Driver License Compact includes 45 U.S. states and the District of Columbia as participating jurisdictions.[5][14] These members exchange driver license suspension, revocation, and traffic violation information to enforce reciprocity across borders.[1] The participating states, which adopted the compact at various points from the 1960s onward, encompass Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming.[5] The District of Columbia joined as a full participant, enabling the same data-sharing protocols.[14] No U.S. territories such as Puerto Rico or Guam are listed as members in official compact documentation.[1] Participation remains voluntary, with states enacting enabling legislation to join and designate a compact administrator for coordination through systems like the State-to-State Verification Service.[2]Non-Participating States and Rationales
The five U.S. states that have not adopted the Driver License Compact (DLC) are Georgia, Massachusetts, Michigan, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.[14][4] These jurisdictions do not formally report convictions for DLC-reportable offenses to other states or treat out-of-state convictions as equivalent under the compact's reciprocity provisions, though they participate in the federally mandated National Driver Register (NDR) for reporting serious violations such as suspensions for driving under the influence or failure to pay child support.[15] Explicit rationales for non-participation are infrequently detailed in official records, as joining requires state-specific enabling legislation that these states' legislatures have not enacted or fully implemented.[1] In practice, this preserves greater state autonomy in driver licensing decisions, avoiding the administrative obligations of mandatory reporting and point assessments for certain out-of-state offenses defined under Article III of the compact. Potential deterrents include the absence of federal funding for DLC operations—unlike the NDR, which receives dedicated federal support—leading to higher state-level costs for information exchange infrastructure and compliance monitoring.[2]- Georgia: Has maintained non-participation since the compact's widespread adoption in the 1960s and 1980s, with no active legislative push to join as of 2025; this allows Georgia to disregard certain out-of-state minor violations without automatic reciprocity, though NDR integration covers major actions.[16]
- Massachusetts: Similarly has not ratified, prioritizing its own graduated licensing and violation treatment systems; out-of-state DLC reports do not trigger automatic suspensions in Massachusetts.[17]
- Michigan: Passed House Bill 6011 in 2018 to authorize potential entry into the compact, but has not completed implementation or full reporting protocols, effectively remaining outside as of 2025; this status limits reciprocal enforcement of violations from DLC states.[18][19]
- Tennessee: Opted against adoption, maintaining independent handling of interstate violations; Tennessee drivers' out-of-state convictions are not systematically forwarded under DLC terms.[20]
- Wisconsin: Remains the sole holdout amid recent legislative activity, including Senate Bill 63 introduced on February 21, 2025, to enable participation by requiring recognition of out-of-state reportable convictions; prior non-joinder reflects concerns over aligning Wisconsin's point system and enforcement priorities with compact standards, alongside resource demands for electronic data sharing.[21][22]