Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In

After a couple of vetoes by Governor Jerry Brown, California finally has a 3-foot passing law.

As of June, 24 states plus the District of Columbia have such a law, which requires drivers to give cyclists a minimum buffer of 3 feet when passing from behind. With California's law in effect as of today, Rick Bernardi of Bob Mionske's bike law blog says 3-foot laws are good for cycling, but could be improved.

There's room to improve 3-foot passing laws, like the one that takes effect in California today. Photo: ##https://www.flickr.com/photos/sfbike/7000434589/in/set-72157629263668356/##SF Bike Coalition/Flickr##
There's room to improve 3-foot passing laws, like the one that took effect in California today. Photo: ##https://www.flickr.com/photos/sfbike/7000434589/in/set-72157629263668356/##SF Bike Coalition/Flickr##
false

Bernardo points out that some laws, including California's, provide exceptions for drivers that weaken cyclist protections. Minimum passing distances should be commensurate with motorist speed, he says, and intentional "buzzing" should be criminalized.

The law should also make collisions prima facie evidence of an illegal pass, Bernardi writes.

When drivers collide with a cyclist while passing, they will often attempt to shift the blame to the cyclist: "The cyclist came out of nowhere" is one common explanation for a crash. "The cyclist suddenly swerved into my path" is another commonly heard explanation. If the cyclist is seriously injured or killed, the driver’s explanation may be the only explanation we hear. More often than not, when a driver says that the pass was "safe" but the cyclist did something that doesn’t make any sense, it really means that the driver wasn’t paying attention, or was passing too close. But under the law, injured cyclists must prove that the driver’s pass was unsafe. 3 foot laws can be strengthened by making collisions prima facie evidence of an illegal pass. This means that when a driver is passing a cyclist and a collision results, the law would presume that the pass was too close. The driver could still rebut this presumption with evidence to show that the pass was not too close, but now the burden of proof would be where it properly belongs -- on the driver who has the responsibility to pass at a safe distance.

Also on the Network today: Streets.MN says investing in transit for "millennials" and "millennials" alone is a bad idea, and the Wash Cycle takes a tour of the Capital Bikeshare warehouse.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

Talking Headways Podcast: One Year of Congestion Pricing

Danny Pearlstein of New York City's Riders Alliance breaks down how advocates made congestion pricing happen in the Big Apple.

January 29, 2026

Improving Road Safety Is A Win For The Climate, Too

Closing the notorious "fatality target" loophole wouldn't just save lives — it'd help save the human species from climate catastrophe, too.

January 29, 2026

Delivery Workers Are the Safest Cyclists On the Road, Study Finds

Deliveristas are less likely to engage in roadway behaviors that endanger pedestrians or themselves. So why are they so villainized?

January 29, 2026

The Cup Runneth Over With Thursday’s Headlines

Density lends itself to an abundance of transportation options and an abundance of money saved by not driving, writes David Zipper.

January 29, 2026

‘Gateway’ Drug: Trump Is Holding the Second Avenue Subway Hostage

The president blocked funds for the Second Avenue Subway during the government shutdown in October — and the MTA has still not received the money, sources said.

January 28, 2026

‘Kavanaugh Stops’ Are Making Streets More Dangerous

In Minneapolis, ICE agents have killed more people than violent drivers so far in 2026, according to Minnesota's crash database.

January 28, 2026
See all posts