For decades, the main penalty for very dangerous driving has been taking away someone’s license. It has one obvious weakness: by one estimate cited by advocates, about 75 percent of drivers with suspended licenses keep driving anyway.

A growing number of states are now trying something different. Rather than simply forbidding a person to speed, they are making it mechanically difficult. The trend has drawn coverage mostly in car enthusiast publications such as The Drive, but it is moving fast.

Where it is happening

Washington, D.C., Virginia and Washington state were the first to act. This year, according to the advocacy group Families for Safe Streets, Arizona, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland and New York followed, bringing the total to nine jurisdictions. Bills have been introduced in many others, including North Carolina and California.

Virginia moved first in practice. Since July 1, judges there can order the devices for people convicted of reckless driving, for two to six months, as an alternative to a suspended license. The Drive reports about 100 drivers have received them so far.

The details differ widely. New York’s version, passed in its state budget, is triggered by 16 or more camera-issued speeding violations in a single year, and advocates project it will affect about 10,000 drivers annually. The Drive describes it as a program centered on New York City. Washington state’s law applies to some drivers whose licenses were suspended for extreme speeding or street racing, with implementation scheduled for later this decade.

How the devices work

The technology is called Intelligent Speed Assistance. The unit connects to the car’s onboard computer, works out the posted limit using GPS and a digital map, and prevents the vehicle from accelerating past it. Think of it as a cousin of the ignition interlock that makes convicted drunk drivers blow into a tube, and like that device it must be installed in each car the person is allowed to drive.

It does not slam on the brakes or shut off the engine. In Virginia’s program, the driver can briefly exceed the limit by 5 mph for 30 seconds, twice per trip, which allows for passing. Tampering carries serious consequences, up to a further year in jail, and at least one Virginia participant has already gotten into trouble for that.

Given the choice, The Drive reports, offenders tend to pick the limiter over a license restricted to commuting.

The case for it

Speeding killed more than 11,000 people in the United States in 2024, and federal figures attribute close to 30 percent of traffic deaths to it. A relatively small group of chronic offenders accounts for a disproportionate share of the worst crashes. In North Carolina, advocates say, habitual offenders were involved in 62 percent of fatal speed-related crashes in 2024.

Evidence for the technology itself is promising but limited. The European Transport Safety Council estimates that it could cut collisions by 30 percent. A New York City trial on 50 fleet vehicles recorded a 36 percent decline in hard-braking events with no reported delivery delays. Neither is the same as a long-term study of repeat offenders, which does not yet exist because the programs are so new. Ignition interlocks, first used in Colorado in 1985 and now required for certain offenders in about 31 states, offer a reasonable precedent.

Amy Cohen, who leads Families for Safe Streets and lost a 12-year-old son to a speeding van in 2013, argues that these drivers can still get where they need to go, only more safely.

The concerns

Critics have raised several practical questions.

  • Accuracy. Some Virginia users have reported GPS drift, where the unit places the car on a neighboring, slower road. On a highway, suddenly being unable to keep up with traffic is a safety problem of its own.
  • Emergencies. A driver cannot easily rush a family member to the hospital or accelerate out of a dangerous situation.
  • State lines. It is unclear how these systems will handle drivers crossing into a state with different rules. Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill requiring in-car speed warnings in 2024, citing jurisdiction problems.
  • Root causes. Some transportation researchers argue that wide, fast roads encourage speeding in the first place, and that focusing on individual offenders leaves the design untouched.

There is also a broader unease. In the European Union, all new vehicles must already have a passive version of this technology that warns the driver. Some American motorists see punishing repeat offenders as the first step toward limiting everyone.