To the best of my knowledge there are four States that require either a fingerprint, or thumbprint, in order to receive a driver's license in that State, which are: California, Colorado, Georgia, and Texas; in addition Texas is the only one of these States requiring a complete set of fingerprints in order to receive a driver's license, to which, this law, was overturned in February of 2015. The fact that these States collect fingerprints whatsoever is disturbing as a driver's license is the primary way that most adults identify themselves. For many people, fingerprinting carries the stigma of guilt and is typically mandated only for those that are arrested for certain criminal offenses as well as for those that are required to submit to background checks for certain, particular employment opportunities.
The general purpose of fingerprints is to correlate fingerprints to a database of crimes that have been committed for review, and the fact that all citizens of these respective States have to submit their finger or thumbprint in order to receive a driver's license from such State, seems of questionable Constitutional validity, as this gives the State government, in one place, facial (as in the driver's license color picture), current address of the driver's license applicant, physical description of the driver's license applicants' height, weight, date of birth, as well as eye color, all of which is individually applied to that unique driver's license number, along with the finger or thumbprint to which all of this information can easily be analyzed, correlated, and processed through databases supposedly to make sure that the driver's license applicant has not fraudulently applied for more than one driver's license, to which this information can easily be cross-checked against numerous other databases for crimes of the past, now, or in the future.
When you take a finger or thumbprint along with the other physical and factual characteristics of an individual or instead take his DNA, you have effectively made it public or in this particular case, State policy, that any citizen, using his most likely source of identity, his most likely source to have a means of independent transportation, his most likely source for employment or enrollment of all sorts, a de facto ward of the State, under the thumb of the State, unable or not easily able to escape from the watchful eye of the State. Today, it is finger or thumbprints, in order to have the privilege to drive in certain States, tomorrow, it may well be DNA, and DNA is considered to be the most accurate forensic tool for law enforcement agencies.
As always, laws such as these are justified by stating that they are to protect us from criminals, terrorists, or to identify illegal aliens, amongst other hobgoblins of fear that the populace needs to be protected from, and as good citizens, it is our duty to obey. The truth of the matter is that fingerprinting for a driver's license is just one more forge in the chain of our own making, that makes us lesser citizens to those that control our fates, to which these authorities answer to no one but their own fellow privileged and elite mates, who want us docile and under their collective thumbs for their continual exploitation of and for their own enrichment of in return for the safety a hamster gets in a cage with a wheel that goes nowhere but to travel back to where it began.