Skip to Content
Streetsblog New York City home
Streetsblog New York City 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 New York City

Streetsies 2025 (And Friday Video!): Vote for Your Favorite Clips of the Year

A New York Met, the birth of "No Kings," and Cuomo running a stop sign are just some of the best things we caught on camera this year.

December 26, 2025

Memo to Mamdani: Support the QueensLink for Better Mass Transit

The Rockaways needs the transit benefits of QueensLink. Our contributor hopes the new mayor puts his weight behind the concept.

December 26, 2025

Streetsies 2025: The Worst From Albany

Albany had its fair share of screw ups in 2025. Take a gander at the worst to come out of state government this year.

December 26, 2025

Streetsies 2025: The Best from Albany

It's that time of year again! Albany often disappoints, but state officials got a few things right, we guess...

December 26, 2025

Friday’s Headlines: Boxing Day Edition

Yesterday was Christmas, but we still have a full news digest for you today.

December 26, 2025

Thursday’s Headlines: Merry Christmas Edition

Day off today, but we'll be back tomorrow.

December 25, 2025
See all posts