 is edging closer to becoming law, putting California once more at the center of discussions on road safety){kind=link}
Sacramento, California – California Assembly Bill 435 (AB 435), filed earlier this year, is edging closer to becoming law, putting California once more at the center of discussions on road safety. Raising the age limit to 16, Assemblymember Lori Wilson of Suisun City proposed this law to ban children and teenagers from sitting in the front passenger seat unless they satisfy specific height and seat-belt-fit criteria.
Though praised by some safety advocacy organizations, AB 435 has also caused concern among certain legislators concerned about real-world practicality, equity, and enforcement issues. Below is a comprehensive look at the bill, from its inception to its current status in the California State Assembly.
Read also: The fast-food industry in California is experiencing a noticeable decline in employment
Early stages and legislative journey
Introduction of the California Assembly Bill 435
Introduced in early 2025, AB 435 has a clear goal: improve child passenger safety. Building on current regulations that currently require booster seats for children under 8 years old or under 4 feet 9 inches, this measure raises the standard by increasing some criteria to children and teenagers who may still be physically vulnerable in the front seat.
From the beginning, the California Assembly Bill 435 outlined a few primary goals:
- Increase the age for mandatory use of booster seats from 8 to 10.
- Require all children under 13 to sit in the back seat unless they can pass the widely referenced “five-step safety belt test.”
- Impose front-seat restrictions for teens up to 16 if they do not meet specific height or fit standards.
Progress Through Committees
AB 435 went before the Assembly Transportation Committee shortly after its introduction; on March 24, 2025, it passed with a unanimous 12-0 vote. Observers pointed to this significant display of solidarity as a sign that committee members really related to public safety issues.
A key gatekeeper evaluating the financial consequences of the legislation, the Assembly Appropriations Committee had advanced the bill to it by April 3, 2025. Though the last text of AB 435 can still change, its fundamental values stay same as it travels through the legislative process.
Key provisions of California Assembly Bill 435 at a glance
To better understand AB 435, it helps to break down its most notable rules:
- Mandatory Booster Seats for Children Under 10
Extending the current booster seat requirement from age 8 to age 10 is one of the most significant changes. Safety experts argue that many children under 10 are not tall enough to be adequately protected by a standard seat belt. - Front Seat Restrictions Until 13 (or Passing the Test)
Children under 13 would be barred from riding in the front seat unless they pass a five-step belt-fit test designed to ensure seat belts fit properly across the torso and lap.- Does the child sit all the way back against the seat?
- Do their knees bend comfortably at the seat edge?
- Is the shoulder belt crossing the center of the shoulder and chest?
- Is the lap belt low on the hips or thighs?
- Can they stay seated like this for the entire trip?
- Teens Up to 16 Under Similar Restrictions
Even teenagers can be affected by the proposed law if they are still small-framed. They, too, must meet the seat-belt-fit criteria before legally sitting in the front passenger seat. - Effective January 1, 2027
If enacted, AB 435 would take effect on January 1, 2027. This gap aims to give hospitals, clinics, and law enforcement time to adapt. Rental agencies would also need to update signage and make booster seats available to families with younger children. - Enforcement and Penalties
Similar to existing child passenger safety laws, the proposed fines begin at $20 for a first offense and $50 for each subsequent offense. Critics argue that while these amounts may seem minor, additional court fees can make the total cost significantly higher.
For more details, you can track the bill’s text and status here.
Why the push? The rationale and supporters
Studies revealing younger passengers—especially those who are shorter or smaller-framed—face greater harm risk while seated in the front have driven AB 435 forward. Citing crash statistics where airbags and seat belt restraints failed to adequately protect smaller bodies, organizations including the California Highway Patrol (CHP), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) strongly support the measure.
They cite data suggesting that suitable restraints on youngsters in the back seat could significantly lower major accident injuries. Comparable regulations in states such Louisiana and Minnesota have shown comparable actions can result in less hospitalizations for youngsters engaged in accidents.
The controversy of AB 435: Enforcement and equity
Despite strong support, AB 435 has not escaped scrutiny. Various lawmakers and community members have voiced concerns about the feasibility and fairness of the new rules:
- Enforcement challenges
There are potential difficulties in enforcing the five-step test, especially in diverse settings, explained Tom Lackey, a Republican from Palmdale and retired CHP officer. Critics wonder how police officers might judge seat-belt fit in a quick roadside stop. - Racial profiling fears
Rhodesia Ransom, a lawmaker from Stockton, explained that she is concerned about the bill’s potential for racial profiling, given the subjective nature of height and fit assessments. This sentiment underscores worries that children from certain demographics may be more likely to be stopped or ticketed. - Rural realities
Heather Hadwick, a Republican representing a rural northeastern district, questions how this bill will fit for cab-only pickup trucks, which is common in rural areas. Families that rely on pickup trucks might find themselves unable to fully comply if they must put multiple children in the back seat. - Large-family logistics
Some see the measure as an additional burden for families that already face limited seating space, especially if several children need boosters at once.
Although no formal opposition group has organized against AB 435 so far, these voices highlight the importance of practical considerations and possible unintended consequences.
Looking ahead
Should AB 435 survive the Appropriations Committee, it will probably go to a complete Assembly vote before going to the State Senate. Should it pass both houses and get the governor’s signature, California would implement by January 1, 2027 one of the most severe youth passenger safety rules in the country. This grace period would provide rental car companies, car manufacturers, and parents plenty of time to follow new criteria.
Read also: California after the devastating fires: Recovery and prevention in the focus
What’s at stake with California Assembly Bill 435
- Assembly Bill 435 aims to ban front-seat riding for most children and teens who do not pass the safety belt test, raising requirements up to age 16.
- It passed the Assembly Transportation Committee unanimously, indicating considerable bipartisan backing.
- Enforcement, racial profiling concerns, and rural logistics are key points of contention.
- If approved, it would become law on January 1, 2027, giving stakeholders nearly two years to adapt.
Californians—especially parents—are watching closely. Advocates contend that the more stringent policies are justified by even a small drop in child injuries or deaths on the road. Critics, on the other hand, still urge changes that accommodate various family needs as well as potential enforcement problems. As AB 435 makes its way through the halls of Sacramento, its outcome may shape not only California’s child passenger guidelines but possibly influence other states reevaluating their own traffic safety statutes.