California · 2025–26 Regular Session · Assembly Bill
AB 1830: Ignition interlock devices.
Passed one chamber Official data
- Introduced
- In committee
- Passed one chamber
- Passed both chambers
- Enacted
Last official action: ·Record last updated:
Plain-language summary
AB 1830 is a assembly bill introduced in the California Assembly on February 11, 2026. According to its official title, it concerns: Ignition interlock devices. Primary sponsor: Cottie Petrie-Norris (D), Lisa Calderon (D), Tom Lackey (R), Rhodesia Ransom (D). It lists 25 additional sponsors. Most recent recorded action (August 19, 2026): Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
Generated automatically from the official title, sponsor list, and status record only. It does not characterize the bill’s purpose or effects. How summaries are written
Official summary
Legislative Counsel’s Digest (official, as of the latest version). Written by nonpartisan legislative staff; reproduced verbatim.
(1)Existing law makes it unlawful for a person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage, has 0.08 or 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in their blood, as specified, is addicted to the use of any drug, is under the influence of any drug, or is under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug to drive a vehicle. Existing law prohibits a person from driving a vehicle under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug and concurrently do an act forbidden by law, or neglect a duty imposed by law in driving the vehicle, which act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to a person other than the driver.
Existing law, until January 1, 2033, requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately suspend or revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon the receipt of an abstract of the record of a court showing that the person has been convicted of driving a vehicle under the circumstances above as well as for engaging in a motor vehicle speed contest for specified periods of time, depending on the statute under which the driving violation was punished, and prohibits the reinstatement of the driving privilege until the person gives proof of financial responsibility and proof satisfactory to the department of successful completion of a driving-under-the-influence (DUI) program, as specified. Existing law requires the department to advise the person that they may apply for a restricted driver’s license if the person meets certain requirements, including, among others, satisfactorily providing proof of enrollment in a certain DUI program and the installment of a functioning, certified ignition interlock device (IID).
Existing law allows, for certain violations, a person who has had their driver’s license suspended to apply to the department for a restricted license, subject to certain requirements. For specified violations, existing law requires the department to issue a restricted driver’s license if the person has met certain requirements, including proof satisfactory to the department of enrollment in, or completion of, a DUI program, proof of financial responsibility, and the payment of all applicable reinstatement or reissue fees, among other fees, required by the department.
This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would reorganize and recast the penalties and sanctions for the alcohol- and drug-related driving offenses described above. The bill would recast violations for driving under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or having 0.08 or 0.04 percent or more, by weight of alcohol in blood (collectively ”alcohol-related driving violations”) from violations for driving under the influence of any drug or driving while a person is addicted to the use of any drug (collectively “drug-related driving violations”). For convictions of alcohol-related driving violations, the bill would require the department to suspend the privilege to operate a motor vehicle and would allow the suspension to be indefinite. The bill would prohibit the reinstatement of that privilege until the person satisfies certain requirements, including, among others, the person applying for and maintaining a restricted driver’s license for certain periods of time depending on the statute under which the driving violation is punished, which includes installing a certified IID on each vehicle operated by the person, providing proof satisfactory to the department of successful completion of a DUI program, as specified, paying all applicable reinstatement and reissue fees required by the department, and providing proof of financial responsibility.
For convictions of drug-related driving violations described above, this bill would require the department to suspend the privilege to operate a motor vehicle for specified periods of time, depending on the statute under which the violation was punished. The bill would also prohibit the reinstatement of the privilege until the person satisfies certain requirements described above, but the bill would not require the person to install a certified IID or apply for and maintain a restricted driver’s license for a specified period of time.
This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would authorize a person, whose privilege to operate a motor vehicle is suspended for alcohol-related driving violations, to apply for a restricted license if certain requirements are met, including, among others, installing a certified IID on each vehicle operated by the person, as specified, providing proof of financial responsibility for 3 years, providing satisfactorily proof of enrollment in, or completion of, a DUI program, as specified, and paying a fee that is sufficient to cover the costs of administration of these requirements. The bill would require the department to terminate the restricted driver’s license and suspend the privilege to drive if the person fails to comply with the DUI program requirements. The bill would also authorize a person, whose driving privilege was suspended for a conviction of a drug-related driving violation, to apply for a restricted driver’s license if similar certain requirements are met, except the person would not be required to install a certified IID but would be required to complete a minimum number of months of a suspension period, as specified.
Sponsors
Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 24 · Republican 5
| Name | Role | Party | Chamber | District |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cottie Petrie-Norris | Primary sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 73 |
| Lisa Calderon | Primary sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 56 |
| Tom Lackey | Primary sponsor | Republican | Assembly | 34 |
| Rhodesia Ransom | Primary sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 13 |
| Juan Alanis | Co-sponsor | Republican | Assembly | 22 |
| Bob Archuleta | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 30 |
| Rebecca Bauer-Kahan | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 16 |
| Heath Flora | Co-sponsor | Republican | Assembly | 9 |
| Mark González | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 54 |
| John Harabedian | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 41 |
| Jacqui Irwin | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 42 |
| Maggy Krell | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 6 |
| Alexandra Macedo | Co-sponsor | Republican | Assembly | 33 |
| Caroline Menjivar | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 20 |
| Stephanie Nguyen | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 10 |
| Blanca Pacheco | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 64 |
| Sasha Renée Pérez | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 25 |
| Sharon Quirk-Silva | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 67 |
| Chris Rogers | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 2 |
| Blanca Rubio | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 48 |
| Pilar Schiavo | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 40 |
| Nick Schultz | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 44 |
| Esmeralda Soria | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 27 |
| Catherine Stefani | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 19 |
| Thomas Umberg | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 34 |
| Avelino Valencia | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 68 |
| Greg Wallis | Co-sponsor | Republican | Assembly | 47 |
| Christopher Ward | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 78 |
| Lori Wilson | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Assembly | 11 |
“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.
Recent official actions
- Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
- Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
- From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 13).
- In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
- From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 1.) (August 11). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
- From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on TRANS. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (August 11). Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
- Measure version as amended on August 5 corrected.
- From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
- Re-referred to Coms. on PUB. S. and TRANS.
- Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
- Withdrawn from committee.
- From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.