Sovereign Citizen Obstruction Behaviour

Question

In the United States, what is the obligation of a police officer to tolerate the Sovereign Citizen obstruction game, lecturing the Officer about the Law and asking questions whose only purpose is to obstruct and take control of the conversation? Is there an acceptable standard for minimum tolerance allowing the driver to play the game? Specifically with regard to the following:

1. At what point can the officer make the arrest after non-cooperation with regard to identifying oneself as the only cause?

2. Once the arrest is made, can the officer proceed to search the identity of the driver in the driver's person and vehicle, even when identity is the only cause?

3. Can the person be transported to a secure facility and held until an identity process is complete, even when the refusal to identify is the only cause?

Answer 1

OP's item 1 says the only cause for a police officer making an arrest is failure to identify oneself. Item 2 mentions a driver. Since there are multiple situations where a driver is required to present a driver license, which would also identify the driver, the only scenario I can think of that fits both items is a passenger refuses to identify him/herself. The ACLU has a Know Your Rights guide which indicates that only some states require people to identify themselves to police, and even then, it suffices to state one's name; presenting an identification document is not required.

When a law enforcement officer makes a lawful arrest, that is normally considered justification for making a warrantless search of the person who was arrested and the immediate surroundings. I think it's unlikely the search could be extended to the person of the driver or other passengers.

Once the person is arrested, the person would be brought to an appropriate facility, where further investigation would be conducted, including looking into the person's actual identity.

Answer 2

An individual that is driving, and has been suspected of committing a traffic infraction. Will be required to present ID when stopped by Police. In most states in the U.S., 'Failure to ID' is a secondary charge. So in order to be arrested for that, a primary offense is required. If the person suspected of the crimes/infractions refuses to ID. Then the Police will try to determine the ID in the station. If the Police are towing the car, they are required to conduct an "inventory" of the car, not a search.

Answer 3

By asking #1, #2 and #3, you're trying to split the hairs of a law that is very clear. Very simply, you are required by law to follow all of a police officer's lawful commands, which includes identifying yourself. If you don't, you are subject to arrest for refusal to follow commands, and possibly subject to a lawful search based on probable cause and what is visible to the officer in the car or on your person, or a later search based on a warrant. You can argue the stop and request for ID and any search in court, and not with the officer. See Do you have to follow all the orders a police officer gives?

Don't fall into the nonsense trap of "Sovereign Citizens." See What are "freemen of the land" or "sovereign citizen" theories and do they hold any water?

As for

Is there an acceptable standard for minimum tolerance allowing the driver to play the game?

Do you really think it is a game? Officers are trained to deal with uncooperative people, and many have been trained in dealing with "sovereign citizens" and extremists of any persuasion. By not cooperating, you stand the chance of the officer legally escalating the situation and are more likely to be searched, transported and eventually lose any credibility or chance of leniancy with a judge.