By Devin Woolf
Distracted driving has become a national concern. With the continued creation of new apps for smartphones, driving while making phone calls is no longer the sole concern. Drivers are now using social media apps such as Facebook and Snapchat while driving. Back in April, one story made national news when a teen used a Snapchat filter to show her friends how fast she was driving. The Snapchat filter showed the teen’s speed at 113 mph. The teen was too distracted with the social media app to notice another vehicle merging onto the highway, and subsequently collided with the other motor vehicle at 107mph. The other driver suffered a traumatic brain injury and now requires the assistance of a wheelchair.
Unfortunately, the story above is just another example of the epidemic that is distracted driving. To highlight just how pervasive distracted driving has become, according to Distraction.gov “In 2014, 3,179 people were killed, and 431,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes involving distracted drivers.” To try to prevent drivers from multitasking when they should be paying attention to the road, many states have passed distracted driving legislation and started campaigns to raise awareness to the consequences of distracted driving. In April of 2016, Massachusetts launched the “U drive. U text. U pay.” campaign. As part of that campaign, any driver caught texting and driving was given a minimum of a $100 fine.
New York state has proposed legislation to catch distracted drivers. The technology to catch drivers using their phones while driving has been dubbed “textalyzer,” making it analogous to the more commonly known breathalyzer technology. “The technology could determine whether a driver had used his or her phone to text, email or do anything else that is forbidden under New York’s hand free driving laws, which prohibit drivers from holding phones to their ears.” The legislation proposes breathalyzer consequences for a driver who refuses to turn over their phone to view their activity, including automatic license suspension.
The proposed bill faces challenges to becoming a law. Forcing a driver to turn over their phone could constitute an unreasonable search and seizure and other privacy concerns. Proponents of the bill argue the privacy concerns are inflated since the technology would not give law enforcement access to the content of the emails or text messages. Instead it would only show what applications were being operated and at what time. Proponents of the bill claim this additional consequence for distracted drivers will make operators more afraid to use their phone while driving and serve as a preventive measure to stop distracted driving.
With all of the recent discussion of privacy concerns in the news after the FBI requested Apple to unlock the phone of the San Bernardino shooter, and Apple refusing; I believe the proposed New York state bill has a tough journey ahead. Even though the content of the driver’s phone will not be revealed, forcing a driver to turn over their cell phone to law enforcement seems like a clear violation of an individual’s constitutional rights. I also do not believe catching drivers after the fact is effective in combating distracted driving. Although the consequence would be hefty, by requiring an automatic license suspension for driver’s not turning over their phones, I think a preventive measure to stop distracted driving before it results in injury or death would be the best solution.
Student Bio: Devin is a third year student at Suffolk University Law School. She is the Production Editor of the Journal of High Technology Law, a member of the Foreign Direct Investment Moot Arbitration Team, and a member of the Phi Delta Phi International Legal Honor Society.
Links:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/02/health/distracted-driving-textalyzer/
http://www.distraction.gov/stats-research-laws/facts-and-statistics.html
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog are the views of the author alone and do not represent the views of JHTL or Suffolk University Law School.
