Punishing Minor Consumption by Suspending Their Driver's License

On June 24, 2010, the Supreme Court of Illinois held that a statute which requires a 90 day driver’s license suspension for underage drinking is constitutional even though no motor vehicle was involved.  The statute is 625 ILCS 5/6–206(a)(43).  The Court held that “The legislature may reasonably determine a young person consuming alcohol under the legal age may also drive after drinking.”  People v. Boeckmann, 238 Ill. 2d 1, 11, 932 N.E.2d 998, 1004, 342 Ill. Dec. 537, 543 (2010).  While it is true that someone under 21 may drive after drinking, it is equally possible that the same person may choose to not drive after drinking.  Suppose a teenager goes to a party, gets drunk, and then calls his/her father or mother to pick him/her up.  The parent is involved in an accident through no fault of their own.  When the police arrive, they speak with the teenager and realize the teenager is drunk.  The police then cite the teen with underage drinking.  In addition to paying a fine for the underage drinking, that teen would lose his/her driving privileges for 90 days, pursuant to 625 ILCS 5/6–206(a)(43).  In reaching this decision, the Court overturned the trial court’s decision holding the statute unconstitutional and decided to not follow a precedent set forth in the case of People v. Lindner, 127 Ill. 2d 124 (1989).  The Court in the Lindner case struck down a statute revoking a person’s driving privileges when convicted of sex offenses where there was no connection to a motor vehicle.  Two of the Justices announced that they thought Lindner was incorrectly decided to the extent it held a revocation or suspension of driving privileges must be connected to a motor vehicle.  Obviously I do not advocate underage drinking and driving.  Certainly no one is arguing for more rights for sex offenders.  With all due respect to the Supreme Court of Illinois, punishing people by taking away their driving privileges when the crimes committed have nothing to do with driving is wrong.  It puts a burden on the individual and upon employers, who may lose well trained workers.  The Boeckmann decision takes away a teenager’s right to drive, which the teenager has earned, because the possibility exists of a teen making a bad decision to drive and if the teen decided to drive, the further possibility that the decision will harm someone.  The Boeckmann opinion fails to consider that the teens who make the bad decision to drink and drive may be just as likely to drink and drive even if they do not have a license.  In those cases where a teenager will drive despite having a suspended license, the Boeckmann decision accomplishes nothing.  So, as a word of advice to anyone under the age of 21 in the State of Illinois, do not drink any alcohol under any circumstance unless you want to risk losing your driving privileges for three months.  For more information about DUI's, see http://www.ellislawfirm.pro/