Civil liberties organizations serve as consumer advocates in the digital identity ecosystem, ensuring that systems designed to verify identity don't become tools for surveillance, exclusion, or control. Groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) have shaped the conversation around mobile driver's licenses and verifiable digital credentials, articulating principles that protect individual rights.
Raising concerns, defining risks
In 2021, when the Department of Homeland Security issued a request for information about mobile driver's license standards, civil liberties groups responded with detailed comments outlining both the potential benefits and the risks of digital ID systems.
Their critiques identified several key concerns. First, if digital ID checks become automated and easily inserted into online interactions, it could become nearly impossible to operate online pseudonymously or anonymously. The convenience of verifiable digital credentials could normalize constant identity verification, fundamentally changing how people interact with businesses and services.
Second, if mDL systems "phone home" to the issuer each time a credential is presented, they create a surveillance infrastructure that generates detailed logs of where people go, what they buy, and who they interact with. Even if governments promise not to abuse such data, its mere existence creates risks of misuse, hacking, or authoritarian exploitation.
Third, millions of Americans lack access to smartphones, reliable internet, or the necessary technical literacy to use digital ID applications. If physical IDs are marginalized or eliminated, these populations could be excluded from essential services, a particular concern for low-income families, seniors, rural residents, and immigrant communities.
Publishing frameworks and guidelines
Beyond raising concerns, civil liberties organizations have published constructive frameworks for building digital identity systems that respect rights. The ACLU's Digital ID State Legislative Guidelines recommend twelve essential safeguards that any state considering digital ID should implement.
These include ensuring that enforcement officers cannot access phones during verification (identity checks must not become de facto device searches), prohibiting systems from sending usage data back to issuers so digital IDs don't create logs of when and where they're used, requiring that users can choose which data fields to share rather than revealing complete credentials, ensuring credentials can't act as digital fingerprints that verifiers use to track people across contexts, requiring that identity remain public infrastructure with interoperable wallets rather than being controlled by single vendors, and mandating that physical IDs always remain valid so no one is forced into digital systems.
Influencing policy and design
These advocacy efforts have tangible effects on policy. Utah Code § 63A-16-1202, one of the strongest digital identity privacy laws in the country, details the requirements for a state-endorsed digital identity that reflects many principles that civil liberties groups have championed. The law prohibits phone-home tracking, requires selective disclosure support, bans forced phone handovers during verification, and ensures physical IDs remain valid.
Similarly, Europe's eIDAS 2.0 regulation requires that digital identity wallets be voluntary and free, support selective disclosure, and avoid central databases, principles aligned with civil liberties advocacy.
Technology providers also respond to these concerns. Privacy-preserving features, such as selective disclosure, offline verification, and zero-knowledge proofs, address specific risks that civil liberties groups have identified. The "No Phone Home" campaign, led by the ACLU, EFF, and EPIC, directly influenced technical architectures that enable verification without contacting issuers.
A necessary voice
Civil liberties organizations play an essential role in the digital identity ecosystem. They ensure that the rush to deploy convenient verifiable digital credentials doesn't inadvertently create surveillance infrastructure. They advocate for populations who might be excluded by digital-first approaches. They provide frameworks that help legislators and technologists build systems aligned with democratic values.
As the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has warned, digital identity systems can “invade our privacy and aggravate existing social inequalities” if they are not built with strong privacy protections. Embedding privacy into both code and law, with civil society keeping systems accountable, is the only way to prevent that outcome. Their role isn't to oppose digital identity, but to ensure it's built right.
Want to keep learning?
Subscribe to our blog.
