Report Traffic Safety Trends | State Legislative Action 2024

State legislatures continue to actively debate and enact traffic safety related legislation, with 44 states passing and enacting nearly 270 traffic safety bills in 2024. Legislatures were particularly active enacting bills regarding aggressive driving, automated enforcement, driver’s licensing, impaired driving and bicyclist safety and school bus safety.

The 2024 report is divided into 11 sub-topic sections, with sections on automated enforcement, bicyclist, pedestrian and micromobility safety, impaired driving and school bus safety forthcoming later in the summer of 2025.  The enacted bills summarized in this report were identified using NCSL’s Traffic Safety Legislation Database.

Aggressive Driving and Street Exhibitions

Nine states—Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Utah—and Washington D.C., enacted 19 bills in 2024 related to aggressive driving, road rage and street exhibitions, e.g., speed contests, burnouts, donuts or other forms of reckless maneuvering of a vehicle.

AAA's 2023 Traffic Safety Culture Index reveals that 81% of drivers surveyed perceive running a red light and 89% perceive rapid lane switching and tailgating to be very or extremely dangerous. Nearly 31% of drivers ages 19-24 shared that they have exhibited aggressive driving behavior at least once in the past 30 days. In contrast, roughly 15% of drivers ages 60-74 reported driving aggressively during the same time span.

Street Exhibitions

Alabama (HB 474) authorized traffic enforcement officers who observe street exhibitions to tow and impound vehicles. Further, the minimum impoundment period for vehicles used in street exhibitions may be extended by court order. Traffic enforcement officers are defined as any parking enforcement or traffic enforcement officer not required to be certified by the Alabama Peace Officers' Standards and Training Commission.

Alabama also prohibited any individual from consenting to their motor vehicle being used in any street exhibition.

HB 474 further permitted that automated enforcement photographic or video evidence can assist in detecting street exhibition violations.

California (AB 2186) expanded its prohibition of street exhibitions to include common settings for street exhibitions, like parking garages and lots.

Further, California (AB 1978) now allows peace officers to not take individuals into custody who helped facilitate a street exhibition by obstructing or placing barriers on highways or other streetways if the peace officer causes the removal and seizure of the vehicle used to commit that offense.

California (AB 2807) included the term street takeover as a synonym for sideshow. A sideshow is defined as, "an event in which two or more persons block or impede traffic on a highway or in an off-street parking facility for the purpose of performing motor vehicle stunts, motor vehicle speed contests, motor vehicle exhibitions of speed, or reckless driving, for spectators."

In California, any person who engaged in a street takeover or sideshow may be imprisoned for a maximum of 90 days and subject to a $500 fine. Starting in July 2025, violators may also have driver licenses suspended from 90 days to six months.

Florida (SB 1764) defined and increased penalties for street exhibitions and coordinated street takeovers. Florida law increased the penalty range for motor vehicle operators, passengers, and anyone filming an exhibition or takeover. The penalty for a first offense ranges between $500 to an increased maximum of $2,000. A second violation that occurs within one year after an initial offense is a third-degree felony. The second violation has an increased fine range of $2,500 to $4,000. Additionally, the violator's driver license will be revoked for two years.

Florida added the term coordinated street takeovers to statute and defined it as "10 or more vehicles operated in an organized manner to effect a street takeover." Additionally, any vehicle used in a street exhibition may be seized by local law enforcement.

SB 1764 expanded prohibited activity to include violations for knowingly impeding, obstructing, or interfering with authorized emergency vehicles during a street takeover. Violations of this prohibition are a felony. The penalty includes a fine between $2,500 to $4,000 dollars, and a license revocation of two years. A second violation includes a four-year license revocation.

Georgia (SB 10) expanded penalties for violating its street exhibition prohibition and added fines for facilitating street racing.

Any operator of a vehicle used in street exhibitions is subject to a fine between $500 to $1,000. The violator faces imprisonment between 10 days to six months. This is an increase from the previous range of $300 to $750.

A second conviction includes an increased penalty range of $750 to $1,500 with imprisonment between 90 days to one year.

A third conviction increased the penalty range between $2,500 to $5,000; paired with an imprisonment period between 120 days and 12 months.

Fourth and subsequent convictions result in an increased fine range between $5,000 to $7,500 and an imprisonment period between one year to five years. However, if any street exhibition resulted in a crash causing injury to another person or property damage worth over $1,000, the first year of any sentence shall not be suspended, probated, deferred or withheld.

Any person who facilitates an exhibition of street racing, such as using a vehicle to block a roadway, is guilty of a misdemeanor and punishable by a minimum fine of $250.

Georgia (SB 63) included stunt driving, the promotion of stunt driving and facilitating a stunt driving exhibition as bail-restricted offenses if it is an individual's second or subsequent violation.

Maryland (SB 442) enhanced penalties for street exhibitions. First, Maryland added language that defined street exhibitions as operating a vehicle near a crowd or gathering in a manner that intentionally results in two or more of the following:

• Excessive, abrupt acceleration or deceleration.
• Skidding, squealing, burning or smoking tires.
• Swerving or swaying of the vehicle from side to side while accelerating.
• Producing unreasonably loud, raucous, or disturbing engine noises.
• Grinding the motor's gears or backfiring the engine.
• Causing the wheels to lose contact with the ground.
• Allowing passengers to ride on the hood or roof.

Any person convicted of a violation is subject to a maximum of 60 days imprisonment or a maximum fine of $1,000. If a person convicted also causes bodily harm to another person, the maximum imprisonment increases to one year.

Further, Maryland enhanced its point assessment for street exhibitions violations. Participating in a speed contest, race, or exhibition on a highway result in an eight-point penalty; any speed contest, race, or exhibition that results in bodily injury to another person results in a 12-point penalty.

The Maryland law allows for street exhibitions exemptions for properly permitted parades that occur within a special event zone.

New York (SB 760) prohibits any reckless driving in a parking lot. Reckless driving is defined as driving or using any motor vehicle, motorcycle or any other vehicle propelled by any power other than muscular power or any appliance or accessory thereof in a manner which unreasonably interferes with the free and proper use of an area, in this instance, parking lots. The definition of a parking lot includes any private property, including any driveway near or contiguous to a property that has the capacity to park four or more vehicles. This prohibition does not apply to any area or areas of private property comprising all or part of property on which is situated a one- or two-family residence.

Ohio (HB 56) added definitions to its list of prohibited street exhibition activities. In addition to street racing, Ohio prohibited burnouts, doughnuts, drifting, wheelies, stunt driving and street takeovers. All these actions are prohibited in public settings. Violations are considered a first-degree misdemeanor. Violators shall have licenses suspended for a period from a minimum of 30 days up to three years.

Any person who helps facilitate a street exhibition shall be equally charged as the participant. None of the listed prohibited activities apply to properly permitted events.

Pennsylvania (HB 2266) increased the fine for violation of street racing and exhibition prohibitions and included a new definition and fine for drifting. HB 2266 also creates penalties for organizers of street racing and exhibitions.

Fines for initial street racing and exhibition violations are set at $500. Second and subsequent violations penalties may be set up to $2,000 per violation, an increase from the previous $250. Violators may face imprisonment for up to six months, or both. Additionally, the motor vehicle used in the offense shall be impounded for up to six months.

Fines specific to drifting, which are defined as "The act of steering a vehicle in a turn in an attempt to make the rear wheel or wheels of the vehicle lose traction and create a controlled or uncontrolled skid sideways," are set at $250.

Fines for organizers who control or finance two or more persons in any street race or exhibition commits an offense and shall pay a fine of $1,000 per vehicle engaged in the race or exhibition. Any organizer that oversees an event that results in bodily injury or death to any individual is guilty of a third-degree felony.

Aggressive Driving and Road Rage

As noted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, there is no commonly used definition of aggressive driving. Generally, "...violations that encroach on others' safe space, such as driving much faster than prevailing speeds, following too closely, making unsafe lane changes, and running red lights, either on one occasion or over a period of time, may indicate a pattern of aggressive driving." NHTSA further mentions that while "States have passed laws criminalizing aggressive driving, it should not be confused with road rage, which is an intentional assault by a driver or passenger with a motor vehicle or a weapon that occurs on the roadway or is precipitated by an incident on the roadway."

Washington, D.C. (B 425) amended the definition of reckless driving. The revised definition states that a person commits the offense of reckless driving if the person operates a motor vehicle 20 mph over a posted speed limit or displays any driving pattern that displays disregard of the risk to any person or property.

Utah (HB 30) enhanced penalties for the offense of road rage, which is defined as when a motor vehicle operator escalates a roadway incidence with the intent to endanger or intimidate another individual. Violators are guilty of a class A misdemeanor, which includes a minimum fine of $750. when a motor vehicle operator escalates a roadway incident with the intent to endanger or intimidate another individual. Violators are guilty of a class A misdemeanor, which includes a minimum fine of $750.

If a road rage incident is classified as a third-degree felony the offender must pay a minimum fine of $1,000 and serve a term of imprisonment between one to five years. Any person convicted of a second-degree felony must pay a minimum penalty of $1,000 and serve a prison term between two to 15 years. HB 30 also permitted driver licenses to be suspended or revoked when an individual driver is convicted of road rage for a period of up to one year.

HB 30 permitted law enforcement to seize and possess motor vehicles used in road rage events without a warrant if an officer has probable cause to believe that the vehicle operator engaged in a road rage event.

Utah also created the Road Rage Awareness and Prevention restricted account to pay for an education and media campaign on road rage awareness and prevention.

HB 30 requires the state Administrative Courts to collect data on road rage enhancements and submit a written report to the Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Interim Committee by Nov. 1, 2027.

Child Passenger Safety

Legislatures continued to refine their child occupant protection laws in 2024.

Arizona (SB 1567) required that child passengers who ride in off-highway vehicles must be properly secured in a child restraint system.

Minnesota (HB 3436) revised its child passenger safety laws.

The law now requires any child under 2 years of age to be properly restrained in a rear-facing child passenger restraint system with an internal harness. A child at least 4 years of age exceeding the weight or height limit of the forward-facing child passenger restrain system must be properly restrained in a booster seat and secured with a safety belt.

A child who is at least 9 years old or exceeds the weight or height limit of the child passenger restraint system or the booster seat must be secured with a safety belt adjusted and fastened to fit correctly.

A child under 13 years old must be transported in the rear seat of a motor vehicle and be properly restrained in a child passenger restraint system or booster seat secured with a safety belt.

Any motorist transporting a child younger than 6 years old and under 60 pounds must transport the child in a rear seat if the vehicle is equipped with an active passenger side air bag restraint system.

A child who, because of age or weight, can be placed in more than one category must be placed in the more protective category.

New York (AB 8557) requires that seat belts be available and used on charter buses for persons aged 8 through 16.

Colorado (HB 1055) increased the age ranges for child restraint system requirements. The law requires children under two years old to be properly restrained in a rear seat child restraint system, rather than the previous law applying to only children under the age of one. Further, if the child weighs less than 40 pounds they must be in a rear-facing restraint system.

The law further requires that children between the ages of two to four and weighing at least 20 pounds must be properly restrained in a rear or forward-facing child seat in the rear seat of a vehicle.

Additionally, children between the ages of 4 to 9 years old who weigh at least 40 pounds are required to be restrained in a child restraint system or booster seat in the rear seat of a vehicle.

Colorado increased the age children are required to use a child restraint system to 9 years of age or under, previously statute required children 8 years old or under to use a child restraint system.

HB 1055 further required that any child between the ages of nine up to 18 years old must wear a seatbelt. Previously, Colorado law set this age range from eight up to 16 years old.

Michigan (HB 4511) amended its child passenger law by adding additional provisions. Michigan law now specifies that a child must be restrained in a rear facing restraint system until the age of two. A child must be restrained in a forward-facing restraint system until the age of 5 years old or older.

Michigan law also now specifies that a child must be restrained in a booster seat until the child reaches a height of 4'9" or the age of 8 years old.

Further, the new law clarified a child between the ages of 13 to 16 must be wearing a seatbelt at all times.

Michigan (HB 4132) provided that courts may waive any civil fines, costs, or assessments against an individual who received a civil infraction for a child restraint system violation so long as they have evidence they have obtained a car seat with specific requirements and proof that the individual has received education on child passenger safety from a certified technician.

Distracted Driving

In 2024, three states—Colorado, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin—enacted legislation further restricting mobile device use while operating a motor vehicle.

Colorado (SB 65) banned the handheld use of phones and mobile electronics while operating a personal motor vehicle. Texting while operating a vehicle was already prohibited in Colorado.

Specifically, holding a mobile electronic device or pinning such a device to your ear while driving is prohibited. Additionally, watching a video while navigating a motor vehicle is banned. However, a motorist resting on a shoulder or parked may use their devices without violating the law. Colorado also provided exceptions to the handheld ban in the event of an emergency.

A first offense results in a $75 plus a $10 surcharge and two points on their driver's license. A second violation that occurs within two years of the initial offense results in a $150 fine in addition to the $10 surcharge and three points on their driver's license. A third or subsequent offense that occurs within a two-year period results in a $250 fine plus a $10 surcharge and four points on their driver's license. However, phones or other electronic devices may not be confiscated following a violation.

Colorado law states that an individual who can produce a hands-free accessory or proof of purchase of a hands-free accessory following a violation can avoid a conviction.

Commercial vehicle operators with valid commercial driver licenses are not subject to the new law. First responders are also not subject to the law.

Pennsylvania (SB 37) expanded their prohibition on using electronic devices while driving to specifically include outlawing playing games, taking images or videos or using social media generally. Pennsylvania permitted the use of these otherwise prohibited devices in an emergency.

Pennsylvania law also specified that using hands-free electronic devices as an accessory or integrated into a vehicle is not a violation of the law. Pennsylvania further required the state police to create education materials on how to detect distracted drivers.

A violation results in a fine of $50. Any motorist who violates this law is only issued a warning during the first year after the effective date.

Pennsylvania also required any person under the age of 18 who applies for a full driver's license to view educational materials related to distracted driving and electronic device use.

Wisconsin (SB 460) specifically banned using a cellphone while driving in construction and railroad maintenance zones to the state's work zone handheld ban.

Driver Licensing

Commercial Driver Licenses

At least 14 states—Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, New Jersey and Virginia—enacted legislation related to CDL licensing requirements.

Two states enacted legislation regarding human trafficking and commercial drivers in 2024. Alabama (SB 258) disqualified any person from driving a commercial motor vehicle for life if convicted of using a vehicle for human trafficking.

Kentucky (SB 199) disqualified any person from driving a commercial motor vehicle for life if convicted of using a vehicle for human trafficking.

Alabama's SB 258 also removed a provision that previously required a CDL holder to notify the state of any local or out-of-state motor vehicle traffic control violations. However, they still must report violations to their employer.

Alabama also lowered its fees to obtain commercial driver license:

• For Class A commercial driver licenses, the fee is $30. It was previously $50.
• For a Class B commercial driver license, the fee is $20. It was previously $40.

Colorado (HB 1250) required individuals convicted of a traffic infraction or misdemeanor offense to complete a traffic improvement course in order to waive commercial license suspension points.

Further, the state Department of Transportation is required to set the maximum number of assessed points that may be waived when successfully completing an improvement course. The DOT must also create instructions on how often an improvement course point reduction waiver may be claimed, set the rules and processes for claiming the waiver and create an approval process for commercial driving school improvement programs.

To obtain approval for improvement courses, a commercial driving school must demonstrate that provided courses address state traffic laws, recognize hazardous traffic situations and teach traffic accident prevention measures.

Colorado (HB 1135) created a class 1 misdemeanor for commercial driver employers who willfully authorize a driver to operate commercial vehicles without proper licensing or is under the age of 21 years old.

Arizona (HB 2438), Delaware (SB 235), Florida (HB 405/ SB 754), Hawaii (HB 2492), Idaho (HB 414), Kansas (SB 462), Louisiana (HB 589), Nebraska (LB 1200), New Jersey (SB 3134) and Virginia (HB 844/SB 353) enacted legislation to meet the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) Clearinghouse guidelines. The guidelines further require that when a person applies for or seeks to renew a commercial driver license or permit, the issuing state-level DOT or other agency must obtain a driving record from the clearinghouse.

The federal law allows the state agencies, employers and law enforcement to access real-time commercial driver information on drug and alcohol violations. Known violators will not be permitted to be issued a commercial license or have a license renewed.

Idaho (HB 414) allowed commercial driver licenses to be renewed every eight years, previously commercial driver licenses had to be renewed every four years. Further, the online renewal fee for commercial driver licenses was reduced by $5.

Indiana (HB 1162) permitted commercial driver license learner permits to be issued as a mobile credential.

Kansas (SB 462) allows for the knowledge and skills portion of the commercial motor vehicle licensing test to be waived if an applicant qualifies for a previous military vehicle service waiver.

Kentucky (SB 199) required that any first-time applicant for a hazardous materials endorsement must complete an entry level driver training.

Driver's Education

Illinois (SB 3151) added worker safety in highway construction and maintenance zones to the state's driver education course.

Minnesota (HB 3071) required the incorporation of plain language standards for written driver's examinations and the driver's manual to ensure the written examination is a fair assessment of the state's traffic and driving laws. The commissioner of public safety is required to submit a report to the legislature that details the implementation of the plain language standards and appropriated funds for that purpose. HB 3071 also made a one-time appropriation of $212,000 for costs related to rewriting the driver's manual with the plain language standards, including translations into other languages.

Mississippi (SB 2695) required the State Superintendent of Public Education and the Commissioner of Public Safety to jointly prepare an estimated budget and fiscal report of the additional expenses and costs related to the implementation of mandatory driver's education programs and present to the Legislature. SB 2695 also added classroom and behind-the-wheel instruction on distracted driving to the State Driver and Education Training Program. The new law also allows a driver education student who is enrolled in an approved driver's education course and is under the direct supervision of an instructor to drive without the possession of a learner's permit or driver's license.

Additionally, the Department of Public Safety is required to establish criteria for a hardship exception. The hardship exception applies to an applicant for a driver's license that was unable to apply for a learner's permit on time due to hardship. The department is also required to establish a driver education and training program, providing a certificate of completion to participants that finish the course.

SB 2695 permits the commissioner of public safety to establish rules, regulations and restrictions for the operation of a motor vehicle during the first 12 months that an individual under the age of 18 possesses a license.

Pennsylvania (SB 37) requires that before a person under the age of 18 years may take the examination for a junior driver's license, they must view educational materials provided on the department's website on the dangers of distracted driving. The law also requires the traffic laws exam to include at least one question on distracted driving relating to the driver's ability to understand the effects of distracted driving. The driver's manual also must include a section relating to distracted driving, along with related penalties.

South Carolina (HB 5023) established the Work Zone Safety program to educate the motoring public on the dangers of committing moving violations while traveling in highway construction work zones. Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to develop an online work zone awareness presentation for all persons obtaining an initial license. All persons obtaining an initial driver's license must take the work zone safety program course.

Tennessee (SB 2356) allowed an applicant who resides 30 or more miles from a driver services center to complete online any classroom training that is required as a prerequisite to obtaining a Class H or hardship license.

Medical Designations

Louisiana (SB 236) allowed driver's license applicants to request a designation of a seizure disorder to be exhibited on their driver's license. To do this, applicants must present a statement from a qualified medical health professional verifying the applicant's disability. A statement from a qualified medical professional is again required when the applicant renews their license. The bill provides monetary penalties for any person who falsely represents themselves to obtain the special designation.

Additionally, the legislation required the establishment of a training course for law enforcement officers' interactions with persons who have a seizure disorder. The course includes training on identifying indicators and procedures when an officer encounters a person experiencing a seizure, unexpected actions potentially taken by such individuals, resources available to them and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

South Carolina (SB 968) added the option for driver's license and permit applicants to disclose their blood types, indicated by a symbol designated by the department on the driver's license and contained in the driver's record. The disclosure requires a certification from a physician or medical provider.

Mobile Driver's Licenses

Illinois (HB 4592) permitted individuals to receive a mobile or electronic driver's license if they are also eligible for a physical driver's license.

Though, a person may be required to produce their physical driver's license by law enforcement or a state or federal agency when necessary.

Illinois implemented privacy requirements related to digital driver's licenses as well. The state is not permitted to track or compile information without the digital card holder's consent. The fee for a digital driver's license shall not exceed $6.

Penalties

Florida (HB 1589) enhanced their offenses for driving without a valid driver's license.

• For a first offense, a second-degree misdemeanor.
• For a second offense, a first-degree misdemeanor.
• For a third or subsequent offense, a first-degree misdemeanor and the violator is subjected to a minimum of 10 days in jail as court ordered.

Idaho (SB 1216) now requires, rather than allows, the DOT to revoke licenses for various infractions if a license is somehow issued.

Kansas (SB 500) allowed certain motorists restricted driving privileges for a period of 60 days that allows them to go to school and/or work, attend medical appointments, attend probation or parole meetings, pick up or drop off a child from school, buy groceries and attend any religious service.

The restricted driving privilege is not accessible for anyone convicted for driving with a canceled, suspended or revoked license more than three times.

Oklahoma (SB 1724) allowed a court to pause a traffic offender's license from being revoked or suspended if they are participating in community service and can provide proof of insurance. If the traffic offender was found guilty of reckless driving or driving with an invalid license, then they are not eligible to have their driver's license suspension paused.

Miscellaneous

Arizona (HB 2438) set a five-year driver's license expiration date for motorists 60 years or older.

Idaho (SB 1365) created a "next of kin database" that asks licensed drivers to provide the names and contact information for two different adults—18 years old or older—to contact in the event of an emergency.

Idaho defines next of kin as the closest living blood relative, including spouse, adult child, parents, siblings, grandparents, aunts and uncles, and cousins.

Maryland (HB 161/ SB277) extended the time a learners permit is valid to one full year after the original issuance date, previously a permit would expire after 180 days.

Maryland also clarified that a driver's license shall remain valid during the time period a person is absent from the state if they are an active military member, a dependent who is residing with a family member outside the state, or a contract employee working on behalf of a federal agency or military branch.

Michigan (SB 799 & SB 706) permitted the secretary of state to reauthorize driver's licenses that were previously suspended due to not paying a previously required driver responsibility fee—Michigan stopped collecting this fee in 2018.

Further, Michigan removed a provision requiring the secretary of state to record a failure to pay the fee on a motorist's driving record.

Michigan (HB 5103) amended law to allow the secretary of state to issue a driver license to an individual who has been convicted of or received a juvenile disposition for two or more moving violations under a state law or local ordinance or a law of another state within the preceding three years.

Motorcycle Safety

At least eight states—Colorado, Delaware, Maryland, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Utah—enacted motorcyclist safety laws in 2024. The topics addressed lane filtering and motorcycle operation, motorcycle equipment, motorcyclist education and motorcycle helmets.

Lane Filtering and Operation Requirements

Colorado enacted a motorcycle lane filtering law in 2024, joining four other states—Arizona, California, Montana and Utah—that have enacted lane splitting or filtering laws in recent years. Utah amended its motorcyclist lane filtering law.

Lane splitting refers to motorcyclists operating between moving traffic at a higher speed while primarily operating along the lane dividing line. Lane filtering is when motorcyclists ride between stopped or slow-moving motor vehicles to the front of traffic.

Colorado (SB 79) allowed motorcyclists to lane filter. Additionally, motorcyclists may only filter through traffic if the operator has enough room to pass between vehicles safely. The passing motorcyclist cannot exceed 15 MPH when passing a vehicle.

Motorcyclists may not pass a vehicle on the right shoulder, or to the right of a vehicle in the furthest right-hand lane, or by moving into the opposite lane of oncoming traffic.

By Jan. 1, 2027, the Colorado Department of Transportation shall report to the legislature on the effects of lane filtering. The report must include data on motorcycle rear-end collisions and on side-swipe collisions before and after lane filtering legalization.

Utah (HB 311) also amended its motorcycle lane filtering law, allowing for lane filtering on off-ramps. Utah defines off-ramps as portions of a roadway that connects a freeway or limited access highway to an intersection. Current Utah law states that motorcyclists may only filter lanes at 15 mph or less and when motor vehicles are stopped. HB 311 further prohibits lane filtering on on-ramps—portions of a roadway that connects an intersection to a highway.

Maryland (HB 102) required motorcycle passengers seated behind the operator to be able to keep their feet on the footrests. Otherwise, a passenger is not permitted to ride on the motorcycle except if the passenger has a permanent physical disability that impacts the ability to keep feet secured on footrests.

Motorcycle Equipment Requirements

Delaware (HB 328) extended a pilot program that allows motorcyclists to use pulsating headlights to alert vehicle operators of their presence. Originally, the pilot was to end Jan. 1, 2025. Under HB 328, the pilot has been extended to June 30, 2030.

New Hampshire (HB 1122) specified the approved headlight lamp colors for motorcycles. Headlamps shall be white when shined against a white surface, all other forward-facing lights must be amber or white. Fog lights are permitted to be yellow.

Utah (HB 122) amended the state's auxiliary lighting requirements for all motor vehicles, including motorcycles. All front facing lights must emit a white or amber color. Lights visible on the side of a vehicle must emit amber lights; rear lights must be amber or red. All lights must emit a steady beam and not blink, rotate or flash. Lighted beams cannot be brighter than the vehicle's original equipped lighting. Further, the light cannot distract or impair the vision of other operators and drivers on the roadway.

Motorcyclist Licensing and Education

Delaware (HB 106) created a Motorcycle Rider Education Advisory Committee, which includes members appointed by the legislature. The committee facilitates the state's Motorcycle Rider Education Program. State agencies may offer input on program improvements to the Committee. Additionally, the committee reviews pending legislation related to motorcycles. Pennsylvania (HB 2177) simplified the schedule for their annual motorcycle safety inspection.

Rhode Island (SB 2836) required motorcyclists at age 16 to obtain limited provisional licenses in lieu of a learner's permit. The limited provision license has similar limitations to those of a learner's permit. Rhode Island also increased the initial license required to operate a motorcycle from $25 to $50.

South Carolina (HB 4673) created a new requirement that motorcycle license applicants who fail the license test at least three times must enroll in a South Carolina technical college motorcycle safety course or its equivalent in lieu of passing the license test.

All motorcycle safety courses taken by applicants are to be at least eight hours long and taught by an accredited instructor. Courses must include successful completion of a skills test.

Motorcycle Helmet Laws

Nebraska (LB 1004) amended the length of the basic safety course requirement needed for motorcyclists to ride without a helmet. In 2023, Nebraska repealed its universal helmet law for motorcyclists aged 21 years or older who completed a three-hour basic motorcyclist safety course.

Now, motorcyclists licensed before May 1, 2024, must submit proof of a three-hour safety course completion to ride a motorcycle without a helmet. Those licensed after May 1, 2024, must complete a 14-hour basic motorcycle safety education course to opt out of wearing a helmet. LB 1004 further requires all motorcyclist passengers under 21 to wear helmets. Passengers who are over 21 and are riding on a motorcycle with an operator also over 21 who has completed the safety course requirements are not required to wear helmets.

Speeding and Speed Limits

State legislatures enacted 20 bills regarding speeding and speed limits in 2024, with four states—Alabama, Delaware, Illinois and Kentucky—enacting Move Over Law bills. Five states—Indiana, Maryland, New Hampshire, New York and Virginia—enacted laws allowing for local flexibility to lower speed limits within their jurisdictions. Four states—Delaware, Michigan, New Hampshire and Virginia—enacted laws altering speed limits. Four states—Colorado, Hawaii, Kentucky and Virginia—in addition to Washington, D.C. and the U.S. Virgin Islands, enacted laws related to speeding and speed limits, like increasing penalties and enforcing school zone speed limits.

Local Flexibility to Lower Speed Limits

Indiana (HB 1090) provided local governments flexibility to set speed limits in specific circumstances. The state required traffic engineers perform an investigation on a highway considered to be a major collector or arterial in an urban district before decreasing the speed limit to less than 25 mph. However, Indiana waived the requirement for an engineering and traffic investigation to decrease the speed limit to 20 mph on a highway classified as a minor collector or local road in an urban district.

Maryland (HB 193) permitted Anne Arundel County to alter its speed limits at an intersection or in an urban district to not less than 25 mph or increase the limit in an urban district to no more than 50 mph.

Further, HB 193 clarified that Anne Arundel County may only decrease the maximum speed limit to not less than 15 mph on a highway only after performing an engineering and traffic investigation. A local authority may not implement a new speed monitoring system to enforce speed limits on any portion of a highway for which the speed limit has been decreased.

New Hampshire (HB 1550) authorized municipalities to reduce speed limits seasonally based on an engineering and traffic investigation either by its own initiative or by a public petition signed by at least 10 residents within a community. A local governing body may reduce any prima facie speed limit to provide reasonable and safe conditions upon any highway affected by seasonal motor vehicle, pedestrian or bicycle traffic.

Only one seasonal speed limit is permitted for a maximum duration of four months in any 12-month period. Further, no speed limit may be set under 20 mph. Local governments may specify the time of day when the speed limit is in effect; however, they are required to bear the cost of seasonal signage indicating seasonal speed limit changes as approved by the state Department of Transportation.

New York (SB 8306) amended Sammy's Law which pertains to speed limits. New York decreased the minimum speed limit on highways that local governments are authorized to set. Local governments may now set a speed limit on any highway at 20 mph, rather than 25 mph. However, where speed limits have been reduced for traffic calming purposes, the speed limit cannot be set under 10 mph, rather than the previous standard of 15 mph.

However, on highways consisting of three or more lanes of traffic moving in the same direction, speed limits may not be set under 25 mph. No local government may alter the speed limit unless the local government provides written notice and an opportunity to comment to the community board or community boards in the area.

Any local governments that desire to implement a speed limit under 20 mph must provide an explanation about how the lower speed limit complies with engineering standards and helps meet public safety goals.

Virginia (HB 1071) authorized localities to reduce the speed limit to between 15 to 25 mph on highways located in their business or residential districts. Any reduced speed limits must be indicated by a lawfully placed sign and the locality must notify the Commissioner of Highways of a change in speed limit at least 30 days prior to any changes.

Speed Limits

Michigan (HB 4012) amended their speed limit law, authorizing county road commissions, township boards and state police to establish maximum and minimum speed limits if they unanimously agree that speed limit alterations will be safer. County and local road authorities may now petition any board of commissioners to change the speed limits on a county highway without the need for a speed study. However, all modified speed limits must be made in congruence according to traffic engineering practices that provide an analysis of the speed of the highway.

Any changes to the speed limit may be made by multiples of five mph (e.g., 5 mph, 10 , 15 mph, etc.). Speed limits may be set lower than the 85th percentile—the speed at which 85% of motorists on a roadway drive at or below—if a traffic engineer's study demonstrates traffic safety hazards associated with higher speeds.

Previously, all desired changes to speed limits in local areas could be set at the 85th percentile of speed measured at the fastest portions of the highway, limiting the range in which speed limits could be changed.

New Hampshire (HB 2024) created a maximum speed limit of 45 mph on rural, unimproved country roads.

Virginia (HB 144) required the Department of Transportation commissioner to notify all local governments of a change in speed limits on highways in their area.

Move Over Laws

Alabama (HB 315) renamed its Move Over Law to the John Hubbard Move Over Act and made several changes to the law. Previous Alabama law required vehicles to move over when approached by emergency vehicles or when coming upon parked emergency vehicles. The amended law now requires a motorist to move over for maintenance, construction and survey vehicles when traveling on a highway with two or more lanes. Fines for violations were also increased, with a $200 fine for a first offense and $250 for a second violation. Third and subsequent offenses are punishable by $300 fines and a driving privilege suspension of at least 90 days.

Any Mover Over Law violations that happen at the same time as other driving violations (e.g., driving under the influence, construction zone violations, distracted driving, etc.) doubles the fine.

Delaware (HB 329) amended its move over law, specifying that when changing lanes is not possible or dangerous, motorists passing stationary vehicles must slow down by at least 20 mph on roadways with posted speed limits of 50 mph or more.

Further, Delaware increased penalties for move over law violations. A first offense results in a $250 fine, a second offense results in a $500 fine. The fines for subsequent violations are set at $1,000. All listed violations may be substituted by community service equal in value to the fine.

Illinois (HB 5370) stipulated that upon approaching an emergency scene with stationary emergency vehicles or construction zones with active workers, motorists must move over to allow for safe room on highways with at least two traffic lanes moving in the same direction and reduce speed to avoid any crashes.

Kentucky (SB 107) expanded its Move Over Law to include any type of disabled vehicle. Upon approaching any type of disabled vehicle displaying warning signals, flashers, or reflectors, motorists must yield the right-of-way and move over when possible to do so safely on roads with at least two traffic lanes moving in the same direction. If a lane change is not possible, motorists must slow down to a safe speed and proceed past the stationary vehicle with caution.

Kentucky law also specified that on four lane highways with a maximum speed limit of 65 mph no motorist may use the leftmost lane unless they are overtaking slower vehicles, yielding to traffic joining the highway or when road conditions prevent the safe use of the right or center lanes.

Miscellaneous

Colorado (SB 100) doubled penalties for commercial vehicles that speed in designated areas on mountain interstate highways. The Colorado Department of Transportation is required to post signage indicating the designated area as a heightened speed limit enforcement zone. The signage must inform the commercial vehicle operator that they are entering or exiting such an area and are liable for increased penalties and fines for speeding. Moreover, commercial operators are not permitted to use the furthest left lane when driving in designated heightened speed limit enforcement zones unless required or authorized to pass by law.

Virginia (HB 282) enhanced penalties for violations committed in highway work zones. Any violations that occur in the vicinity of a highway work zone when workers are present and when the work zone is indicated by appropriately placed signs is a traffic infraction punishable by a fine of $300 for a first offense and a minimum of $500 for any subsequent offense. Any subsequent offenses that occur within the same 12-month period in a work zone shall result in a minimum fine of $750.

Washington, D.C. (B 425) established the STEER act (Strengthening Traffic Enforcement, Education, and Responsibility). The Steer act created an additional administrative method for suspending driving privileges and immobilizing motor vehicles based on traffic tickets accumulated over any consecutive six-month period, regardless of whether the fine for the ticket is paid or unpaid, or motor vehicles are registered in- or out-of-state.

The STEER act authorizes the Washington, D.C., attorney general to file suits against negligent motorists from out-of-state with excessive and outstanding traffic tickets. Further, the STEER act created a safe driving curriculum and authorized the DMV to waive outstanding fines and fees for speed violations based upon participation in the education program.

Additionally, Washington, D.C., also created a new point system for motorists caught repeatedly speeding. Speeding 11-15 mph over the limit is two points; speeding 16-19 mph over the limit is three points; speeding 20 mph or more over the limit is five points; reckless driving is five points; and aggravated reckless driving is 10 points.

Any motorist that receives a total of 10 points in a single six-month period is eligible to have their vehicle booted and/or towed. Furthermore, the motorist must participate in a safe driving course to release their vehicle.

The STEER act also created the Intelligent Speed Assistance Program requiring any motorist convicted of reckless driving to enroll into the program. Motorists will have an intelligent speed inhibitor installed in their vehicle and receive a restricted license. Motorists must enroll in the program for one year following an initial aggravated reckless driving charge. The enrollment time increases to two years for a second offense, and three years for a third offense. A motorist will be required to be enrolled indefinitely upon the fourth and any subsequent offenses.

Hawaii (SB 2819) required that motorists traveling 10 mph under the posted speed limit with five vehicles following immediately behind must move off the roadway at the nearest safe location to allow for motorists to pass them.

Hawaii (SB 3242) also directed the Hawaii DOT to evaluate high-risk or dangerous corridors and intersections based on crash, injury and fatality statistics. In response, the DOT must develop and prioritize plans to address safety and allow access for all users in each high-risk or dangerous corridor or intersection.

When changes to high-risk areas are implemented, priority must be given to those that will maximize safety and provide access to separated or protected infrastructure that safely separates vehicles from vulnerable road users.

Hawaii also allowed for any reductions in speed limits that occur within one mile of a school to be exempt from engineering study requirements.

Kentucky (SB 107) amended its reckless driving law to include violations that occur within work zones that endanger people, property, equipment or other vehicles. Further, Kentucky included that motorists must yield the right of way to utility workers in work zones.

The U.S. Virgin Islands (B 271) created the School Speed Zone and Enforcement act. The act requires the Department of Education and Law Enforcement to establish school speed zones in proximity to schools to enhance safety. School speed zones will be monitored by Law Enforcement, who are permitted to issue citations for violations.

Any person who violates speed limits in school zones is subject to a $500 civil penalty. A third of the fines collected from school zone speeding violations must be allocated to the Virgin Islands Police Department for traffic safety education programs, and improvements in school zone safety infrastructure, 33.3% of the fines shall be allocated to the Department of Education to be used exclusively for career technical education schools, programs, or courses and 33.4% must be deposited into the Public Road Fund.

The bill also outlines a collaborative framework involving the Department of Education and the Virgin Islands Police Department to establish and enforce reduced speed limits during specified hours, along with promoting road safety through public education campaigns.

Teen Drivers

Eight states—Colorado, Delaware, Idaho, Iowa, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah—enacted legislation related to teen driving in 2024. Topics included modifications to learning permit requirements, special licenses for working minors and driver education program funding.

Learning Permit Requirements

Colorado (HB 1021) changed learning permit requirements starting Jan. 1, 2027. The new requirements include a 30-hour driver education course for minors between 15 to 18 years old. Applicants between ages 18 to 21 must complete either a four-hour pre-qualification driver awareness program or a 30-hour driver education course.

Colorado continues its requirement that applicants complete a minimum of 50 hours of driving experience with a driver supervisor, with 10 hours spent behind the wheel at night.

Colorado also expanded who is authorized to sign off on the completion of the hour requirements for learner permit applicants. Previously, Colorado law specified a parent, legal guardian or responsible adult as a valid signee. However, HB 1021 expanded the valid signees to include the following:

• The minor's parent or stepparent.
• The minor's grandparent with power of attorney.
• An individual who is 21 years of age or older and who signed the affidavit of liability.
• The minor's foster parent who signed the affidavit of liability.
• An approved driver education instructor.
• An alternate permit supervisor who is 21 years of age or older and is appointed by the person who signed the affidavit of liability.
• If the minor is a foster child, an individual authorized to supervise the foster child.

Additionally, any motorcycle learners permit applicant under 21 years of age must complete a motorcycle safety course before being awarded such a permit.

Delaware (SB 231) expanded who is permitted to participate in a learners permit program. Delaware expanded its law to include individuals in the Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families custody, an individual who exited Department custody to adoption or guardianship at age 16 or later, an individual who exited custody at age 18 or an individual who receives independent living services from the Department.

Delaware also amended its annual program reporting requirements. SB 231 included the new reporting requirement of describing ongoing barriers to obtaining driver education for foster youth. Delaware maintained that the annual report to the General Assembly must include information on the number of individuals in the program and the total amount of funds disbursed to assist with driver education. Delaware also removed the program's previous sunset clause.

Idaho (HB 531) created a parent-student on-road driving program in rural areas. Parents or guardians qualify to provide driving training if they: possess a valid Idaho driver's license; have not received any suspensions, revocations, or cancelations within the previous two years and live in a rural school district or a school district that does not offer a driver education course.

The program requires a minimum of 92 total hours of training that matches what is taught in the Idaho driver's education curriculum. The student must complete an online Idaho digital learning alliance driver education class.

The program requires at least 50 hours dedicated to behind the wheel driving on streets or highways and a minimum of 10 hours driving after sunset or before sunrise. Parents or guardians must complete and submit a training log to be submitted to the county driver licensing office.

The program comes with a $10 education course fee for applicants who participate in a parent-student on-road drivers training.

Mississippi (SB 2695) required driver education courses at all secondary schools in the state starting in the 2026-2027 school year. The State Superintendent of Public Education and Commissioner of Public Safety must jointly prepare a driver education program that features both classroom and behind-the-wheel instruction that is available for both secondary school students, home schooled students and for adults who did not previously enroll in a driver education program.

The program must include instruction related to distracted driving and drug use in addition to existing education on alcohol and general safety.

Mississippi does not require the driver education student to possess a learner's permit or driver's license while under the supervision of a driver education instructor.

Mississippi also provided that the commissioner of public safety may establish motor vehicle operation rules and regulations during the first year for an individual under 18 years old.

The superintendent and commissioner must prepare an estimated budget and fiscal impact report for mandatory driver education course implementation for the Legislature by July 1, 2025.

South Carolina (HB 4673) specifies that a person is not required to obtain a beginner's permit to operator a motor vehicle if they have satisfied the permit requirements as designated by law with sufficient driving experience as exemplified by taking the DMV's driving test. For example, driver education course students at least 15 years old do not need a beginner's permit to operate a motor vehicle when also accompanied by a qualified instructor. Applicants aged 18 or older are permitted to take the driving test after holding a beginner's permit for at least 30 days.

Additionally, an individual seeking a moped operator's permit is not required to hold a beginner or learners permit beforehand.

Special Licenses for Minors

Iowa (SB 2109) created a special minor's restricted license to be issued to applicants between ages 14 to 18 years old who perform farm work and other labor. This license replaces the previous special minor's license.

The special minor's restricted license allows minors to drive to and from employment up to 25 miles without a fully graduated driver license. A licensee may drive over 25 miles as long as they attend a public school and reside within that public school district's boundaries.

To obtain a special minor's restricted license, an applicant must hold an instruction permit for six months before applying and also complete a driver education course. Additionally, the applicant must possess a certification from the applicant's school certifying extracurricular activities and courses taken.

Parents or guardians of the applicant must submit a written consent form to the Iowa Department of Transportation. The licensee is required to carry the consent form at all times while operating a vehicle.

Any applicant whose driving privileges have been suspended, revoked or cancelled for any period before application is ineligible to apply for the special license. Any applicant at fault for a motor vehicle crash or convicted of a violation is also ineligible.

Oklahoma (SB 1766) lowered the qualifying age to obtain a farm vehicle permit from 15 to 13 and half years old if they are enrolled in a driver education course.

A farm vehicle permit allows an operator to use farm vehicles like trucks and trailers for use on farm grounds and between farms and markets. The permit is temporary and expires 30 days after issuance and is only allowed for farm residents.

Driver Education Funding

Utah (HB 250) increased the Automobile Driver Education Tax Account reimbursement amount that is given to schools. The account helps offset costs associated with driving education courses.

The increased reimbursement amounts are capped at the following rates:

• $150 per student who has completed driver education during the school year. Previously, the rate was $100.
• $45 per student who has only completed the classroom portion in the school during the school year. Previously, the rate was $30.
• $105 per student who has only completed the behind the wheel and observation portion in the school year. Previously, the rate was $70.

Additionally, the bill now allows any school to use additional school funds to subsidize driver education.