Bill would require ignition interlock devices for all alcohol-involved DUI convictions

Assemblymember Petrie Norris told the Senate Transportation Committee that Assembly Bill 18 30 would "replace the limited repeatedly extended pilot program with 1 permanent statewide IID ignition interlock device program" and would require an ignition interlock device for every alcohol-involved DUI conviction, including some first-time offenders. She said the bill consolidates overlapping statutes into "a single and coherent framework" and expands a financial-assistance program to prevent cost from blocking compliance.

The bill drew sharply personal testimony from victims and sustained support from law enforcement and safety groups. Colin Campbell, a member of MADD's national board, told the committee about a 2019 crash that killed his two children, saying, "Both my children were dead," and urging the committee to eliminate judicial discretion to mandate IIDs in cases where judges previously declined to require them. Sean Tolisz, president of the California Police Chiefs Association, testified the state records "over 1350 fatal DUI collisions each year," and argued mandatory IIDs for first-time offenders would reduce repeat fatal collisions.

Opponents, including public-defender organizations, said the bill would remove essential judicial discretion and could disproportionately harm low-income Californians who cannot afford device fees or installation. Esther Mendez, a deputy public defender representing a Local 148 public-defender union, said the measure "is going to disproportionately impact poor people" and criticized the role of private vendors and the device's limits as a substitute for treatment.

The committee's chair expressed a separate, procedural objection: he said the bill as drafted forecloses an attorney's ability to argue "extraordinary circumstances" in court and asked for language allowing a judge to exercise discretion when a judicial finding of exigent circumstances exists. The chair said he would cast a no vote unless that narrow exception were added.

After extended discussion and a quorum roll call, the committee moved the bill to the committee on appropriations; the clerk recorded successive tallies during the session and the chair and author acknowledged the bill had been advanced out of committee. The author said the bill's goal was simple: "the goal of a b 30 18 30 is to save lives before the car even starts."