If a law enforcement officer compels you to leave a vehicle on a traffic stop without asking for a license, it is not a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
In the 1977 case Pennsylvania vs. Mimms, the Supreme Court held that law enforcement officers are entitled to require the driver of a vehicle to exit their vehicle and that this can occur prior to the continuation of the traffic stop. In 1997, this was affirmed and expanded to include passengers in the case of Maryland vs. Wilson.
If a law enforcement officer searches your person during a traffic stop without asking for a license, it is not necessarily a violation of the Fourth Amendment, depending on the circumstances of the search.
A simple pat-down, if based on reasonable suspicion, is permitted as established in case law (Terry vs. Ohio). Further, if an officer has a warrant or probable cause, a more invasive search can occur, and presentation of a license does not need to be requested. For example, if a police officer pursued and stopped a car from the scene of a robbery she witnessed, she would have probable cause to search both the occupants of the vehicle and the vehicle itself; no license or other information would first—or, indeed, ever—need to be requested from the occupants of the vehicle.
A person who feels a search of their person or property may not be lawful should state clearly that they do not consent to a search. Beyond that, a person who feels that their rights were violated by a police officer should do nothing at the point of violation. In a plurality of states, statutory law establishes that resisting a search or arrest is a crime, even if the search or arrest itself is unlawful. The only recourse an aggrieved person has is to seek relief from a court.