Under proposed legislation, California teens under age 16 would be required to sit in the back seat if they don’t meet height requirements.
By RYAN SABALOW
Calling “shotgun” to ride in the front seat may no longer be an option for small-sized California middle and high schoolers.
Citing crash statistics that show small-framed children, regardless of age, are disproportionately hurt in crashes when not in the back seat or using a booster seat, traffic safety advocates are pushing for a controversial bill that would ban teens up to 16 years old from sitting in the front seat if they’re not tall enough.
The bill would require all children younger than 10 to use booster seats and bar all those under 13 from sitting in the front seat. The pending measure also would require children as old as 13 to use a booster seat unless they meet the same size criteria.
Current California law requires children to use booster seats until they turn 8 or reach a height of 4 foot 9 inches, though the California Highway Patrol recommends all children younger than 13 sit in the back.
Last week, the Assembly Transportation Committee voted to advance the new, more restrictive booster rules, Lori Wilson’s Assembly Bill 435, which has support from some child and automotive safety and health care groups. Violators would face tickets of $20 for a first offense and $50 for each subsequent offense.
Wilson, a Democrat representing Suisun City, told the committee she remembers “being a child calling shotgun” so she could ride in the front seat.
But she said alarming numbers of kids are getting hurt or dying in crashes because safety belts and airbags aren’t fitted for their small bodies.
“God forbid something happens, we want our children to be safe,” Wilson told the committee.
Under Wilson’s bill, beginning in 2027, a child would need to pass a “five-step test” to be able to ride in the front seat or move out of a booster seat, depending on the child’s age:
- Does the child sit all the way back against the seat?
- Do the child’s knees bend comfortably at the edge of the seat?
- Does the belt cross the shoulder between the neck and arm, resting on the collarbone?
- Is the lap belt as low as possible, touching the thighs?
- Can the child stay seated like this for the whole trip?
The CHP, AAA, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the California Department of Public Health, the California Hospital Association, American Academy of Pediatrics and other groups promote the use of the five-step test to determine if a child is ready to use a seat belt instead of a booster seat, according to the bill’s proponents.
Wilson said Louisiana and Minnesota have enacted similar laws.
Another opportunity for racial profiling?
All 12 Democrats on the transportation committee voted to advance the measure, though some, including Rhodesia Ransom of Stockton, had concerns. Noting that she has “a 23-year-old, height-challenged child whose legs often don’t go over chairs,” Ransom, who is Black, said she was worried the bill would give police an excuse to pull over people of color like her.
Wilson, who’s also a member of the Legislative Black Caucus, acknowledged Ransom had a point.
“A police officer could profile them … and say, ‘I’m going to use the five-point test,’ ” she said. “Hopefully that is rare.”
The four Republicans on the committee did not vote on Wilson’s bill, which counts the same as voting “no.” As CalMatters has reported, the widespread practice of dodging tough votes allows legislators to avoid accountability.
Republican Assemblymember Tom Lackey, a retired CHP officer representing Palmdale, told the committee he worries the bill would be hard to enforce.
“Determining the age of children is very difficult to do when you have no verifying identification at that age level,” he said. “So you’re going to have to trust the parents.” He added that parents won’t want an officer reaching into their vehicle and touching their child’s thigh to make sure the seat belt is properly fitted.
Assemblymember Heather Hadwick, a Republican representing the rural northeastern corner of California, was concerned that Wilson’s bill didn’t address cab-only pickup trucks that many of her constituents drive. Wilson told her not to worry.
“Since this law has been incorporated in other states, I’m positive that we can find a solution,” Wilson said.
Other ‘nanny state’ bills have failed
San Joaquin Valley Republican David Tangipa, who recently was a tight end on Fresno State University’s football team, asked how a child-sized booster seat would have worked with his large-framed Polynesian family.
“When I was about 12 years old, I was 6 foot and 210 pounds,” he said. “I’m the smallest out of my siblings.”
Jennifer Rubin, an advocate for Safe Kids Greater Sacramento, told Tangipa that he and his siblings would have passed the five-step test earlier because they were tall.
Rubin’s group is a lead supporter of the bill. No group formally opposed it.
The bill now moves to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Democratic-authored bills rarely fail to advance out of their first committee. But from there, the most controversial bills that become “nanny state” fodder for conservative media can sometimes get watered down or killed.
For instance, last year, Gov. Gavin Newsom stepped in to kill a bill that would have prohibited young children from playing tackle football. Proponents of the legislation said young children suffer too many head injuries playing the sport.
Newsom also killed proposed legislation last year by San Francisco Democratic Sen. Scott Wiener that originally would have required “speed governors” to be installed in any new car in California. The devices would have blocked motorists from driving more than 10 mph over the speed limit. The bill was amended to have cars make a “brief, one-time visual and audio signal to alert the driver each time they exceed the speed limit,” according to the bill’s analysis.
Newsom vetoed that bill in September, saying the federal government is responsible for implementing such regulations, not California.
Asked last week about the teen booster seat bill, Newsom spokesperson Daniel Villaseñor declined to comment, saying the governor doesn’t typically comment on pending legislation.
