Originally Posted by
nikwax
"If you read the actual case and not rely on what CNN claims, the case clearly states that you only have to tell the cops your name and birthdate. Hiibel refused to tell the cops his name."
If you had actually read Hiibel, you'd know you are wrong here.
From Justice Kennedy's majority opinion in Hiibel arguing that asking for Hiibel to identify himself did not violate 4th and 5th amendment rights:
"In contrast, the Nevada Supreme Court has interpreted NRS §171.123(3) to require only that a suspect disclose his name. See 118 Nev., at ___, 59 P. 3d, at 1206 (opinion of Young, C. J.) ("The suspect is not required to provide private details about his background, but merely to state his name to an officer when reasonable suspicion exists"). As we understand it, the statute does not require a suspect to give the officer a driver's license or any other document. Provided that the suspect either states his name or communicates it to the officer by other means--a choice, we assume, that the suspect may make--the statute is satisfied and no violation occurs
."