Your car. Your rights. Your choice.

STOP THE
CAR
MANDATE

Congress buried a surveillance law in a 2,702-page infrastructure bill. By 2027, every new car sold in America must watch your eyes, monitor your breath, and can refuse to let you drive. No opt-out. No privacy protections. No consent.

Take Action Now Learn What's Happening
SECTION 24220 · INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT 2021 · MANDATORY BY 2027 · NO OPT-OUT · BIOMETRIC DATA · EYE TRACKING · BREATH SENSORS · NO FEDERAL PRIVACY PROTECTIONS · YOUR DATA CAN BE SOLD · FALSE POSITIVES CAN STRAND YOU · CONTACT YOUR REP NOW        SECTION 24220 · INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT 2021 · MANDATORY BY 2027 · NO OPT-OUT · BIOMETRIC DATA · EYE TRACKING · BREATH SENSORS · NO FEDERAL PRIVACY PROTECTIONS · YOUR DATA CAN BE SOLD · FALSE POSITIVES CAN STRAND YOU · CONTACT YOUR REP NOW       
2021 Year the mandate was quietly passed inside a 2,702-page infrastructure bill
2027 Target year every new passenger vehicle must have surveillance systems installed
0 Federal laws restricting how automakers can use or sell your biometric driving data
$500 Estimated per-vehicle cost increase passed directly to consumers
The Law

WHAT IS THIS MANDATE?

Section 24220 of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act — also called the HALT Drunk Driving Act — requires NHTSA to mandate "advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology" in every new passenger vehicle sold in the United States.

The technology includes infrared cameras that track your eye movement and pupil dilation, breath sensors that passively sample the air in your car, and steering/movement sensors that monitor how you drive. If the system decides you're impaired, it can prevent your car from starting or limit its speed.

The law has no opt-out provision. It says nothing about what automakers can do with the biometric data collected. And we already know what they do with data — General Motors sold driving behavior data to insurance companies without consent. The FTC stopped GM. No one stopped everyone else.

NHTSA missed its November 2024 deadline to finalize rules. The mandate still stands. The fight is happening right now.

2021
Signed into law. Buried in the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. NHTSA given until November 2024 to finalize rules.
2023
NHTSA issues ANPRM. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking opens. Over 18,000 public comments submitted.
2024
Deadline missed. NHTSA says the technology "is not ready." Deadline passes without final rule. Law still on the books.
2025
FTC acts — but only on GM. GM banned from selling driving data for 5 years. Every other automaker still operates with no restrictions.
2026
Congressional fight intensifies. Reps. Massie, Roy, and Perry push amendments to defund the mandate. Amendment fails 164–268. Battle continues.
2027
Target implementation. Once NHTSA finalizes rules, automakers get 2–3 years to comply. The window to stop this is now.
Why It Matters

THIS ISN'T JUST ABOUT DRUNK DRIVING

The stated goal is saving lives. That's real. But the surveillance infrastructure being built goes far beyond detecting a 0.08 BAC — and once it's installed in 100 million vehicles, it doesn't go away.

👁️
Biometric Surveillance
Your eye movements, pupil dilation, head position, and drowsiness patterns collected every time you drive. This is intimate biometric data with no federal protections on who can access it or how long it's kept.
📋
No Privacy Protections
The law says nothing about data ownership, retention limits, or sharing restrictions. Automakers can upload your biometric data to their servers and share it with anyone — including insurers who will use it to raise your rates.
⚖️
Fourth Amendment
The government is mandating that private companies install continuous surveillance of American citizens in their personal vehicles — with no warrant, no probable cause, and no due process before the car decides to strand you.
⚠️
False Positives Are Certain
Even 99% accuracy means thousands of sober drivers stranded every day. Bright sunlight, medical conditions, fatigue after a night shift, swerving to avoid a deer — any of these can trigger a false positive. No appeals process exists.
🔄
Over-the-Air Expansion
These systems are software-integrated. Automakers can expand monitoring capabilities through remote updates after you buy the vehicle — potentially without your consent or knowledge.
🏛️
Government Access
Without explicit legal protections, a subpoena or warrant can compel manufacturers to hand over your impairment data — including false positives. The surveillance infrastructure, once built, is available for purposes beyond its original intent.
Take Action

WHAT YOU CAN DO RIGHT NOW

The most effective things aren't petitions or social media posts — they're direct constituent pressure and formal public comment. Here's what actually moves the needle, in order of impact.

1
Call Your Representatives

A 2-minute phone call carries more weight than 10,000 petition signatures. Staffers tally calls individually. Use the rep finder below — say you oppose Section 24220 of the IIJA and want them to support repeal legislation.

Find Your Rep
2
Submit a Public Comment to NHTSA

NHTSA's rulemaking process legally requires the agency to respond to substantive public comments. The official docket is NHTSA-2022-0079. When the next proposed rule (NPRM) publishes, a new comment period opens — your comment becomes part of the administrative record the agency must address. Demand data retention limits, sharing prohibitions, and opt-out provisions.

Go to Docket NHTSA-2022-0079
3
Support Rep. Massie's Repeal Effort

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) has led the legislative fight against this mandate. Contact his office to express national support — even if he's not your rep, constituent support signals outside his district still matter to his colleagues.

Contact Rep. Massie's Office
4
Support the EFF & ACLU

The Electronic Frontier Foundation and ACLU have formally opposed this mandate in rulemaking comments. They have the lawyers and lobbyists to fight it in court and in Congress. Your support funds that work.

Join the EFF
5
Spread the Word

Most people have no idea this law exists. Share this site. The more constituents who call their reps, the more political cost there is to letting the mandate stand. Share on social media, send to your groups, talk about it.

Share This Site
6
Buy Pre-2027 If You Can

The mandate only applies to new vehicles. Your current car will never be retrofitted. When shopping for your next vehicle, used pre-2027 models won't have this technology. Market signals matter — automakers already oppose the mandate on cost grounds.

Find Your Rep

WHO REPRESENTS YOU?

Enter your ZIP code to find your U.S. Senators and House Representative with direct contact links. Call them — it takes 2 minutes and it matters.

AI Letter Generator

WRITE YOUR REP IN 30 SECONDS

A personalized letter is more effective than a form letter. Tell us a little about yourself and Claude will draft a message you can copy, edit, and send directly to your representative.

FAQ

COMMON QUESTIONS

No. The mandate only applies to new vehicles manufactured after the final rule takes effect. There is no provision to retrofit existing vehicles — it would be mechanically impractical and prohibitively expensive. Your current vehicle is safe.
Not exactly — but that framing isn't entirely wrong either. The law doesn't give the government a direct remote shutdown capability. The system is on-board and acts autonomously based on its own sensor data. However, the concern is legitimate: the law creates surveillance infrastructure with no privacy protections, the data can be subpoenaed, and "the car decides" offers no due process. The kill switch framing is simplistic but the underlying concerns are real.
That's the stated goal and drunk driving deaths are real — nearly 13,000 per year. But Rep. Massie and others have proposed a more targeted alternative: ignition interlocks on the vehicles of convicted drunk drivers. That achieves the same safety outcome without subjecting every American driver to mandatory biometric surveillance. Blanket monitoring of all drivers because some drive drunk is constitutionally and morally questionable, especially with no privacy protections on the data collected.
No. NHTSA hasn't finalized its rules — the agency already missed its 2024 deadline and said the technology isn't ready. The legislative fight is active right now in Congress. Rep. Roy's FISA amendment to repeal the mandate is live. The window to stop or significantly reshape this is open. The time to act is before the final rule is published, not after.
Currently, the law has no opt-out provision and no data use restrictions. Oregon passed a state law requiring automakers to honor universal opt-out requests for vehicle data. There is no federal equivalent. This is one of the most important things to demand in NHTSA public comments — explicit data retention limits, sharing prohibitions, and opt-out provisions.
Interestingly, yes — at the federal level. The NHTSA ANPRM document itself explicitly states that the Safety Act's "make inoperative" prohibition applies to manufacturers, dealers, distributors, rental companies, and repair shops — but not to individual vehicle owners. NHTSA says it "encourages" owners not to disable safety systems but federal law does not prohibit them from doing so. State laws may vary. This is directly from the official rulemaking document (Docket NHTSA-2022-0079).
Absolutely. Publishing factual information about a law and helping people contact their elected representatives is explicitly protected First Amendment political speech. NHTSA holds public comment periods specifically because citizens are supposed to push back on rulemaking. This is how democracy is supposed to work.