SB 13 makes several changes to Indiana criminal and traffic law focused on dangerous driving conduct and related enforcement tools. The bill creates a new offense called “dangerous spinning,” which applies when a person knowingly or intentionally operates a vehicle in a repeated or continuous manner to cause a rotational skid and does so in a way that endangers another person. That offense is a Class A misdemeanor, but it becomes a Level 6 felony if the conduct is done with the intent to obstruct traffic. The bill also amends the existing obstruction-of-traffic statute to specifically cover obstruction accomplished by a motor vehicle performing a rotational skid, and it adds defenses for controlled skids performed to avoid a traffic accident.
The bill also expands forfeiture and licensing consequences tied to these offenses. A vehicle used by its owner to commit dangerous spinning or obstruction of traffic involving a rotational skid becomes subject to seizure for civil forfeiture. In addition, the bill adjusts specialized driving privileges procedures so that eligible people may request those privileges earlier in the case process, and it clarifies related suspension rules. It also makes a minor technical change to the school bus passing statute, including a rebuttable presumption that the vehicle owner committed the violation in certain cases.
More broadly, SB 13 amends multiple sections of the Indiana Code, including provisions on school bus violations, specialized driving privileges, civil forfeiture, dangerous spinning, and obstruction of traffic. Its practical effect is to give law enforcement and prosecutors new tools to address street takeovers, reckless spinning, and traffic-blocking conduct, while also creating explicit statutory exceptions for off-road recreation areas, authorized private property, and controlled maneuvers intended to avoid collisions.
The general sentiment reflected in the bill’s progress is strongly supportive. The Senate committee reported the bill favorably by a 6-1 vote, and the full Senate later passed it overwhelmingly on third reading by a 48-1 vote. That voting pattern suggests broad agreement that the conduct targeted by the bill is a public safety concern and should be punished more clearly and more severely.
The main points of contention appear to center on how broadly the new offenses and forfeiture provisions should reach, especially for conduct involving vehicle skids that may be part of driving control or evasive action rather than intentional dangerous behavior. The bill addresses that concern by including defenses for controlled skids used to avoid a traffic accident and by limiting application in off-road or otherwise permitted settings. Another likely point of debate is the use of civil forfeiture and the presumption against vehicle owners, which can raise concerns about property rights and proof standards, although the bill narrows some of those provisions to owner conduct or owner knowledge.
SB 13 amends Indiana Code provisions in Title 9 and Title 35 to create new criminal penalties for dangerous spinning and to incorporate rotational-skid conduct into the obstruction-of-traffic statute. It also expands civil forfeiture law to allow seizure of vehicles used by their owners for dangerous spinning or rotational-skid obstruction, and it makes conforming changes to related driving-privilege and school-bus enforcement statutes. The bill affects drivers, vehicle owners, prosecutors, courts, and law enforcement, and it takes effect July 1, 2025.
The bill appears to have broad bipartisan or at least broad chamber support, with a strong committee recommendation and a near-unanimous Senate floor vote. The available record shows little overt opposition in the voting history, suggesting the legislature viewed the measure as a public safety response to reckless driving and traffic obstruction. The lone dissenting vote indicates some limited concern, but the overall sentiment was clearly favorable.
The most notable contention is the balance between public safety enforcement and overbreadth. Critics of similar measures may worry that the dangerous-spinning and obstruction provisions could sweep in conduct that is not truly malicious, especially in situations involving loss of traction, evasive driving, or vehicle malfunction. The bill responds by creating defenses for controlled skids intended to avoid accidents and for obstruction caused by malfunction. Another area of concern is forfeiture: the bill authorizes seizure of vehicles used in the offense, which can be controversial because it affects property rights and can reach owners beyond the immediate driver, though the bill limits seizure in some cases to owner involvement or owner permission.