Holding Cellphone while driving is illegal, California court rules
74 comments
·July 5, 2025userbinator
dlcarrier
This makes sense, from a political perspective. Cell phone usage while driving causes major harm, and while hands free devices don't significantly reduce that harm (https://www.fastcompany.com/91076805/cellphones-hands-free-d...) banning use of cell phones while driving is politically untenable, because constituents want to be able tu use cell phones while driving. Writing a law to ban the holding of a cell phones while driving, without banning their actual use, provides the appearance that politicians care about the constituency, without the inconvenience of regulations that actually impact safety.
From a statistical perspective, it's possible that it's worse than having no regulation at all, because people take more risks when using safety equipment (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4767144/), so ineffective safety equipment might increase risk taking, making a net negative effect.
nandomrumber
Right.
The least dangerous way of using a device while driving is to hold it in front of you in a way that doesn't block your forward field of few but also doesn't require you to look away as mounted devices do.
tzs
How about making it so cell phones limit most functionality when in a moving car going faster than some threshold, unless making an emergency call?
Perhaps with an exception that allows full functionality if the car and the phone support some way to precisely localize the phone within the car to being somewhere other than near the driver?
josephcsible
Things you own shouldn't enforce laws against you, especially with a guilty-until-proven-innocent system.
BenjiWiebe
You'd better have that exception in there.
Absolutely infuriating when the family minivan refuses to let the passenger change the Bluetooth pairings while driving.
whiplash451
I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic but this sounds absurd to me.
Operating a phone while driving - whether it is mounted or not - is irresponsible. Period.
tremon
I don't really disagree, but cars are still allowed to be sold with mounted touchscreens from the factory. I don't see a good rational reason why operating a mounted touchscreen phone should be illegal when operating the wipers or AC is done the same way.
mingus88
My vehicle UI is not a general purpose internet device. I can access vehicle features and that’s pretty much it. My car doesn’t even let you open the preferences for Spotify unless you shift to park.
I can’t watch TikTok or message people. I literally saw a dude watching a movie on his phone on the freeway the other day.
People need consequences for that level of irresponsibility and I’d prefer it happen before there is a collision.
kgermino
In theory those screens are regulated to be safe to use while driving - my car for example has a lot of more complex features disabled while the car is in gear - while the phone does not have the same safeguards.
Whether those safeguards are effective is a separate, albeit critical, question
mhb
Yes. The obvious conclusion is that touchscreens for those functions should also be illegal. It would be better if they didn't need to be illegal and, if their use resulted in an accident, the user would be liable, but concluding that would be challenging.
standardUser
Given the 'single swipe' restriction, it's impossible not to extend that argument to changing the radio, adjusting your seat or turning on the AC.
bluefirebrand
I think the difference is that changing tactile knobs and dials and buttons can be done without looking
Touchscreens lack that ability, you have to look at them to interact with them
whiplash451
You can manipulate all these with minimal or no disruption of the driver. There are designed to be so.
userbinator
Depends what you're using the phone for. Navigating? That's equivalent to a dedicated GPS unit, and AFAIK those have always been legal. On the other hand, if you're doomscrolling TikTok then it's a distraction regardless how the phone is held.
null
_aavaa_
The same laws should extend to the 18” tablets many cars seem to be going towards.
whiplash451
Many cars have functions that are disabled on the screen when the car is moving. The carmaker can enforce that on the car’s screen. It can’t be enforced on a phone.
tylerflick
I hate being cynical, but in LA this ruling means nothing. I can’t remember the last time I saw someone pulled over for a traffic offense.
linotype
You’re not being cynical, just realistic. The later model year Mercedes or BMW the more likely I see some thirty something talking into the bottom of her phone. They don’t have Bluetooth on Mercedes?
slumberlust
I'll take that over the eyes in the lap group I see everywhere everyday.
testfrequency
All this tells me is that you live in either North Hollywood, Santa Monica, or Glendale.
no-reply
I know somebody who tried to check their phone on a red light and got pulled over/fined for it, this was ~4 weeks ago.
Edit: This was in Riverside County (~60 miles from LA)
emilsedgh
I was fined for using a phone a while back. Fine aside it had a very bad impact on my insurance prices.
djmips
Are tinted windows legal in CA? If your windows are super tinted or you car is lifted - it might be quite difficult to see that someone is using their phone.
OptionOfT
Some tint is allowed, but the legal limit is rather low. It needs to let in 70% of the light on the front side windows, and nothing is allowed on the front windshield (bar a strip at the top).
whiplash451
If you’re engaged into a serious accident and your phone history shows that you were texting while driving, this law will get you under a pile of trouble.
checkyoursudo
I send texts via voice command/dictation all the time. How would this be distinguished?
bigfatkitten
Because the device records detailed usage information with timestamps such as device locks/unlocks, the screen lighting up and going dark, apps going in and out of focus, and in many cases details of exactly what you were doing in the app.
https://cellebrite.com/en/how-a-suspects-pattern-of-life-ana...
https://cellebrite.com/en/samsung-rubin-digital-forensics-va...
jon_adler
In Australia it has been illegal for ages. They have also had mobile (cell) phone cameras for years to penalise drivers. They claim that distracted drivers are as dangerous as drunk drivers. Why is LA only doing this now?
vineyardmike
It's generally illegal in (most?) of the United States to "use your phone" while driving. I think this news is more of a clarification on what "using a phone" means.
stuckkeys
Washington state has been doing this for a while also. Phones have to be mounted or you get penalized.
TrackerFF
Here in Norway, it has been illegal some years. The fine for using a cellphone while driving has been going up year after year.
Right now, the fine is equal to around $1035, with a couple of "marks" on your drivers license (if you get too many of them, you lose your license for some time).
IIRC, the only exemption here is if your phone is mounted to the dashboard.
poplarsol
The great thing about California is that most things are de jure illegal and de facto unenforced until someone decides to make an example of you.
Enginerrrd
That's certainly how CA gun laws are. They're almost all performative and make things very annoying or expensive for legal owners but do very little to dissuade illegal use. Yet, if you own guns and do anything with them, it can be surprisingly easy to accidentally commit a felony while otherwise being a responsible owner. Which... is just not how felonies should work.
OptionOfT
> Mounted phones, and drivers operating them with a single swipe, are exempted, according to the decision, but looking at a map while holding the phone would violate the current law, the court ruled.
If car screens were grouped under the same ruling, a lot of modern implementations would (rightfully) be illegal.
On a modern BMW with iDrive 8 I need at least 2 presses to change my blower settings, all while the temperature indicator is flashing at me that it is heating / cooling.
null
BeFlatXIII
Pokémon Go players in shambles!
unyttigfjelltol
The law prohibits concerns "handheld wireless telephone or an electronic wireless communications device." So, this is ok as long as the device is unable to connect to WiFi?
Any what, exactly, does looking at a map have to do with telephones or communications? I despair far too often reading court decisions.
kylecazar
Good time to remind everyone to get a driver-facing dashcam.
tremon
Should be sufficient to just use the front-facing camera on the phone, yes? Because of the screen, you can even apply your make-up with your other hand that way.
null
nandomrumber
This makes me want to put shaving cream on and pretend to shave while driving.
Anyway, distracted driving is probably already an offense in most places I'd want to live.
tzs
Here's the text of the current law [1] for those curious. That link is to the heart of it, but for completeness there is more on the next and previous pages at that link.
Some observations.
1. The gist is that driving while "holding and operating a handheld wireless telephone or an electronic wireless communications device" is prohibited unless it is specifically designed and configured to allow voice or hand-free operations and it is used in that matter.
2. "This section shall not apply to manufacturer-installed systems that are embedded in the vehicle".
I wonder where this leaves CarPlay and Android Auto? My understanding is that while these use the car's infotainment system for their UI the applications such as navigation are running on your phone.
3. There is an exception allowing use of the driver's hand if two conditions are satisfied:
• The device is mounted on the windshield in the same manner as a a portable GPS as described in some other section of the Vehicle Code that they cite or it is mounted or affixed to the dashboard or center console in a way that doesn't interfere with the view of the road.
• The driver's hand is used to activate or deactivate a feature or function with a single swipe or tap of the driver's finger.
It's interesting to compare with other states to see the different expressions of essentially the same intent. I just recently had occasion to look at Washington's equivalent [2] law. It's more concise in some parts and more detailed in others.
It starts out with a general prohibition:
> (1) A person who uses a personal electronic device while driving a motor vehicle on a public highway is guilty of a traffic infraction and must pay a fine as provided in RCW 46.63.110(3)
That's followed with some exceptions including contacting emergency services, some transit system employee communication with dispatch services, some commercial driver use within the scope of their employment, and operators of emergency vehicles.
It defines some of the terms:
> "Driving" means to operate a motor vehicle on a public highway, including while temporarily stationary because of traffic, a traffic control device, or other momentary delays. "Driving" does not include when the vehicle has pulled over to the side of, or off of, an active roadway and has stopped in a location where it can safely remain stationary.
and
> "Personal electronic device" means any portable electronic device that is capable of wireless communication or electronic data retrieval and is not manufactured primarily for hands-free use in a motor vehicle. "Personal electronic device" includes, but is not limited to, a cell phone, tablet, laptop, two-way messaging device, or electronic game. "Personal electronic device" does not include two-way radio, citizens band radio, or amateur radio equipment.
and
> "Use" or "uses" means:
> (i) Holding a personal electronic device in either hand or both hands;
> (ii) Using your hand or finger to compose, send, read, view, access, browse, transmit, save, or retrieve email, text messages, instant messages, photographs, or other electronic data; however, this does not preclude the minimal use of a finger to activate, deactivate, or initiate a function of the device;
> (iii) Watching video on a personal electronic device.
[1] https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-veh/division-11...
Mounted phones, and drivers operating them with a single swipe, are exempted, according to the decision, but looking at a map while holding the phone would violate the current law, the court ruled.
Makes sense. It seems they're considering the distraction as being caused by trying to hold the device, and not merely its use.