In gambling, they call it moving the lines. In government, it’s more about solving a problem before it starts.

Last November, I predicted we wouldn’t end the decade without at least one lawsuit alleging a law enforcement officer violated privacy rights when accessing a digital identification on a mobile device. Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias has been pushing Illinois into the 21st century. Lawmakers approved optional digital driver licenses in 2024, and Apple users could begin enrolling on Nov. 19. Samsung and Google users should have the option this year.

The original statutory language specified that when a user shows their phone ID, that doesn’t constitute consent for looking at anything else:

“Display of a mobile identification card shall not serve as consent or authorization for a law enforcement officer, or any other person, to search, view or access any other data or application on the mobile device. If a person presents the person’s mobile device to a law enforcement officer for purposes of displaying a mobile identification card, the law enforcement officer shall promptly return the mobile device to the person once the officer has had an opportunity to verify the identity of the person. Except for willful and wanton misconduct, any law enforcement officer, court or officer of the court presented with the device shall be immune from any liability resulting from damage to the mobile device.”

“Your information is presented digitally to the identity reader, so you’ll never need to show or hand over your iPhone or Apple Watch to any business,” according to the state’s Mobile ID website.

But I wasn’t the only one convinced that the law, as written, wouldn’t prevent problems. Last week, state Rep. Ryan Spain, R-Peoria, introduced House Bill 5539 to further clarify the original legislation. In an email, Spain told me the proposal resulted from “several issues” Joint Committee on Administrative Rules members discussed during their meetings.

“As a result, Secretary Giannoulias agreed to advance this trailer bill to update the enabling statute to clarify terms, prohibit an outside party from taking physical possession of a mobile ID device and prevent any permanent storage of data from a mobile device,” Spain wrote. “This is a great example of the bipartisan rulemaking process at JCAR.”

The bill synopsis said the proposal “Changes references from ‘electronic credential’ to ‘mobile identification card’ ” and “Provides that no relying party, including law enforcement, may take physical possession of a mobile identification card holder’s mobile device for purposes of verifying the mobile identification card holder’s identity.”

Spain’s bill hasn’t moved since he filed it Feb. 6, and he remains the only sponsor, but that hopefully changes soon.

Civil litigation remains possible, but perhaps take the over on Dec. 31, 2029.

• Scott T. Holland writes about state government issues for Shaw Local News Network. He can be reached at sholland@shawmedia.com.