Consular cards were not designed to be identification and no treaty recognizes them as such. Legal travelers, visitors and long-term residents carried passports, visas or green cards for that purpose.

In this quote, Elton Gallegly, a former U.S. Congressman, is clarifying the purpose of consular cards and their distinction from more formal identification documents like passports, visas, or green cards. Gallegly explains that consular cards were not intended to serve as legal identification under international treaties. Instead, they were meant for use by foreign nationals seeking consular services, not as a substitute for the documents required for entry, stay, or work in the United States.

The context of this statement likely arises from discussions around the use of consular identification cards, which are issued by foreign governments to their nationals living or traveling abroad. In the United States, some local jurisdictions began accepting these cards as a form of identification for immigrants, particularly those without other forms of documentation. However, Gallegly points out that no treaty or formal agreement recognizes consular cards as valid for purposes such as immigration or legal residency.

Gallegly's remark also highlights the legal distinction between various forms of identification required for lawful travelers, visitors, and residents. Passports, visas, and green cards are internationally recognized documents that grant legal rights to the holder in foreign countries. By contrast, consular cards lack this recognition and do not carry the same legal weight in matters of immigration and residency.

Ultimately, Gallegly’s quote underscores the importance of adhering to established legal processes for immigration and identification. It serves to clarify the limited role of consular cards, which should not be confused with formal, internationally accepted forms of documentation required for lawful entry and stay in the U.S. or other countries.