Modify requirements for a vehicle approaching a vehicle that is stopped or occupying the shoulder of the highway with warning lights flashing.
Summary
SB 38 amends South Dakota’s “move over” law to expand and clarify driver duties when approaching vehicles on or near the roadway with warning lights activated. The bill keeps the existing requirement to stop for stopped authorized emergency vehicles using red lights, and it adds specific rules for vehicles stopped or parked on the shoulder using amber, yellow, or blue warning lights. On multi-lane roads and interstates, drivers must merge into the lane farthest from the vehicle at least 300 feet before reaching it and proceed with caution. On two-lane highways, drivers must slow at least 300 feet before the vehicle to a speed 20 mph below the posted limit, or to 5 mph in very low-speed zones, and proceed with caution unless directed otherwise.
The bill also updates the penalty provisions. A violation remains a Class 2 misdemeanor with a minimum fine of $270, and if a driver violates the rule and causes an accident, the offense is elevated to a Class 1 misdemeanor when the crash involves either a stopped emergency vehicle with red lights or a vehicle on the shoulder using amber, yellow, or blue warning lights. In practical terms, the bill broadens roadway safety protections to include more roadside vehicles and work or service situations, not just traditional emergency vehicles.
Impact
SB 38 amends South Dakota Codified Laws §§ 32-31-6.1 and 32-31-6.2, expanding the state’s roadside safety and move-over requirements. It affects drivers statewide, especially on interstates, multi-lane highways, and two-lane roads, and it provides additional protection for emergency responders, tow trucks, maintenance vehicles, and other vehicles using warning lights while stopped or on the shoulder. The bill also preserves and reinforces criminal penalties for noncompliance and for crashes caused by violations.
Sentiment
The available voting history shows strong, unanimous support for the bill at every recorded stage, with no recorded dissenting votes in committee or on the floor. That pattern suggests broad agreement that the measure is a public-safety improvement and a straightforward clarification or expansion of existing traffic law. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded debate indicating opposition or reservations.
Contention
There is no documented contention in the provided materials, and all recorded votes were unanimous. If any concerns existed, they are not reflected in the available record. Based on the text, the only likely policy questions would be whether the 300-foot merge/slow-down requirement is easy for drivers to follow and whether the expanded coverage to amber, yellow, and blue warning lights could create enforcement or public-awareness issues, but no legislator is shown raising those points here.