Senator Malcolm Sydnor presented SB292, a bill that would reclassify a set of low‑level, often equipment‑based traffic violations as secondary offenses so an officer could not initiate a traffic stop solely for one of those listed infractions. Sydnor said the change would reduce the number of “pretextual” traffic stops, lower racial disparities in enforcement and refocus police resources on conduct proven to cause crashes and injuries.

The bill’s sponsor listed categories to be reclassified: minor equipment defects, certain registration or plate issues (with technical amendments under discussion), window‑tint, single nonfunctioning bulbs in some contexts, temporary‑tag irregularities and similar non‑safety items. The proposal would also include an exclusionary rule: evidence obtained during a stop initiated only by one of the newly listed secondary infractions would not be admissible in criminal proceedings.

Nut graf: Supporters — including the Office of the Public Defender, advocacy groups, academics and the Policing Project — argued that non‑safety stops are the most racially disparate category of traffic enforcement and that reclassifying them reduces risk of escalatory encounters and focuses enforcement on speeding, reckless or impaired driving. Opponents, including sheriffs, chiefs and state’s attorneys, warned that the bill would tie officers’ hands in detecting stolen cars, illegal guns, stolen plates, interstate fraud and other crimes often discovered during traffic stops and could remove a tool used to interdict criminal behavior.

Public defenders described body‑camera footage of dangerous stops begun by minor violations; Tia Holmes from the Office of the Public Defender cited cases such as Damonte Ward and others to argue the current practice can lead to fatal outcomes. Research witnesses, including the Vera Institute of Justice and the Policing Project, said that nationally many jurisdictions have reduced pretextual stops without increasing crash rates; they recommended shifting enforcement to speed, impaired driving and aggressive driving, which drive injury and fatality statistics.

Law‑enforcement witnesses said not all listed infractions are merely trivial: they pointed to missing plates, tags issued to other vehicles and single‑headlight circumstances that can signal stolen cars, active warrants, or unlicensed drivers; chiefs and prosecutors said the changes could make it harder to recover guns or stolen property, and warned that vendor arrangements for toll and plate management add complexity. Several law‑enforcement witnesses also warned that the bill’s administrative penalties on officers and the planned exclusionary rule would generate unintended operational and legal consequences.

Ending: The hearing generated sustained discussion; senators asked for county‑level breakdowns of traffic‑stop data and sought clarifications on specifics (for example, whether a single defective headlight remains an arrestable offense when public safety is at risk). The sponsor said he would work on technical amendments and welcomed follow‑up conversations; no committee vote was taken.