Plaintiffs,

            v.

       ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF
       PUBLIC SAFETY,

            Defendant.
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
                                                 )
 
                                                           Case No. CV-98-193-G

 
                   COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

       Come now the Plaintiffs, Scott McDonald, as next friend for and on behalf of his sons, Christopher
      and Nathan McDonald, and aver as follows regarding this their complaint against the above named
      Defendant which seeks declaratory and injunctive relief:

       A. THE PARTIES AND BASIS FOR ACTION

       1. The Plaintiff, Scott McDonald, is a citizen of the State of Alabama, residing in Gurley, Madison
      County, Alabama, and he is the father, guardian and next friend of the minor Plaintiffs, Christopher
      and Nathan McDonald.

       2. The Defendant, the Alabama Department of Public Safety, is an agency of the State of Alabama
      established pursuant to law (1975 Alabama Code §32-2-1), and it has implemented an administrative
      rule, §760-X-1-.19 of the Alabama Administrative Code, which abridges the legal rights and privileges
      of the minor Plaintiffs, Christopher and Nathan McDonald. This action against an agency of the State
      of Alabama is authorized via §41-22-10 of the 1975 Alabama Code; see State Personnel Board v.
      Cook, 600 So.2d 1027 (Ala.Civ.App. 1992).

       3. In general, Plaintiff Scott McDonald’s sons, Christopher and Nathan McDonald, recently reaching
      the age of 15 years, have attempted to secure Alabama learner permits and licenses to drive an
      automobile upon the highways of this state, but were denied such because of their refusal to provide to
      the Defendant any social security numbers; this complaint raises several claims relative to such
      unlawful demands of the Defendant.

       B. COUNT ONE: DECLARATORY RELIEF

       4. The Plaintiffs are God fearing, Christian people. They firmly know and believe that Jesus Christ is
      the Son of the one and true living God; that nobody goes unto the Father except by belief and faith in
      the Lord; that the Lord forgives all sin, and that salvation is the gift of God, obtainable only by belief
      that Christ is the Son of God sent to save the world from its sins.

       5. The Plaintiffs further possess a firmly held religious belief that sometime in the future and most
      likely during their lifetimes, the Anti-Christ as described within the Book of Revelations in the Bible
      will appear upon the Earth, and that Anti-Christ will cause all people on the Earth to be marked upon
      their right hands or foreheads with the "Mark of the Beast." Further, the Plaintiffs believe that as
      Christians, they cannot worship the Beast or take his mark on penalty of eternal damnation.

       6. The Plaintiffs sincerely believe that the social security number as established under federal law is
      either the precursor of the "Mark of the Beast," or is actually such mark and will in the future be
      implanted on an individual’s right hand or forehead.

       7. As a result of such firmly held religious beliefs, Plaintiff Scott McDonald has renounced his
      previous acquisition of a social security number for himself, and is determined that his children,
      including the Plaintiffs Christopher and Nathan McDonald,  will neither apply for or otherwise obtain
      the number.

       8 . The minor Plaintiffs Christopher and Nathan McDonald have never been employed, have never
      submitted any application to obtain a social security number, have never acquired such a number and
      avow they never will because of their religious beliefs.

       9. On July 31, 1997, Plaintiffs Christopher and Nathan McDonald became 15 years of age and thus
      were entitled to apply for and obtain a learner’s permit for the driving of an automobile as authorized
      by Alabama law.

       10. Within the next two (2) months, the Plaintiffs attempted on several occasions to obtain the needed
      Alabama learner’s permit but were refused due to the unlawful demands made by the Defendant that
      the Plaintiffs Christopher and Nathan McDonald obtain and submit a social security number as a
      condition precedent to securing learner’s permits.

       11. The Defendant has promulgated §760-X-1-.19 of the Alabama Administrative Code, which
      provides as follows:

           §760-X-1-.19: Requirement The Social Security Number Be Divulged In Order To Obtain A
           Driver License.

           (1) All persons applying for a driver license shall be required to furnish to the Alabama
           Department of Public Safety their social security number in order to obtain an Alabama driver
           license.

           (2) The Department shall use such numbers for the purpose of administering the driver license
           laws of this state and for such other purposes as may be permitted under state and federal law.

           (3) The Department shall maintain the confidentiality of social security numbers obtained by it
           except to the extend [sic] the use of such numbers is permitted by state and federal law.

           Statutory Authority: Code of Ala. 1975, §§32-2-9, 32-6-13; 42 U.S.C. §405(c).

       12. The Plaintiffs contend that the requirement made by the Defendant that Christopher and Nathan
      McDonald  provide a social security number to obtain learner’s permits is illegal and invalid for the
      following reasons:

      A. Such rule abridges their religious rights and freedoms protected by the First Amendment of the
      United States Constitution; and

      B. Such rule constitutes an illegal demand for personal information not authorized by law.

      In contrast, the Defendant asserts that its demands that Christopher and Nathan McDonald provide
      social security numbers to obtain Alabama learner’s permits is valid.

       13. There is currently a controversy between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant regarding the necessity
      of obtaining and submitting a social security number to secure a learner’s permit, which controversy is
      capable of resolution only by this suit for declaratory relief in which the respective rights of the parties
      may be adjudicated and determined.

       Wherefore, the premises considered, the Plaintiffs demand that the Defendant answer this complaint
      for declaratory relief and therein identify the precise statutory or regulatory authority under which it
      acts and demands that Christopher and Nathan McDonald obtain and provide a social security
      number to secure learner’s permits to drive an automobile under Alabama law; and that upon final
      hearing in this cause, this Court declare and adjudge the following:

       (A) that such statutory or regulatory authority upon which the Defendant acts, and especially
      §760-X-1-.19 of the Alabama Administrative Code, is violative of federal law and/or abridges the
      constitutional rights of the Plaintiffs to freely exercise their religious beliefs; and that enforcement of
      the unlawful policy upon which the Defendant acts is illegal as to these Plaintiffs. See Stevens v.
      Berger, 428 F.Supp. 896 (E.D.N.Y. 1977); Callahan v. Woods, 658 F.2d 679 (9th Cir. 1981); Callahan
      v. Woods, 736 F.2d 1269 (9th Cir. 1984); and Leahy v. District of Columbia, 833 F.2d 1046 (D.C.Cir.
      1987).

      (B) that Alabama Admin. Code §760-X-1-.19 is unlawful and unconstitutional. See Clark & Murrell v.
      Port of Mobile, 67 Ala. 217 (1880); State v. Firemen's Fund Ins. Co., 223 Ala. 153, 134 So. 858 (1931);
      and State v. Proetorians, 226 Ala. 259, 146 So. 411 (1933).

      (C) that a state agency’s demand for a citizen to provide a social security number without compliance
      with the federal Privacy Act for a party who falls outside the scope of 42 U.S.C., §405 is unlawful.

      Plaintiffs further pray that this court grant such other, further and different relief to which they may be
      entitled.

       C. COUNT TWO: INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

       14. Plaintiffs Christopher and Nathan McDonald currently meet all eligibility requirements under
      Alabama law and applicable regulations to obtain a learner’s permit to drive an automobile, excepting
      for the unlawful demands made by Defendant.

       15. Plaintiffs Christopher and Nathan McDonald desire to exercise their lawful right to secure a
      learner’s permit as soon as possible and to be free from the unlawful demands made by Defendant,
      which are posing to them irreparable harm and injury.
 
       Wherefore, the premises considered, the Plaintiffs move this Honorable Court pursuant to Rule 65,
      Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, for a temporary restraining order, preliminary and permanent
      injunctions against enforcement of the Defendant’s unlawful policy which denies to Christopher and
      Nathan McDonald the right and/or privilege of driving upon the roads of Alabama on the grounds that
      they have failed to supply social security numbers to the Defendant.

       Respectfully submitted this the 23rd day of January, 1998.
 
 

             ________________________________
             Lowell H. Becraft, Jr.
             Attorney for Plaintiffs
             209 Lincoln Street
             Huntsville, AL 35801