H
HoughMade
Guest
I looked at the issue of the federal law a bit- please not, I am not advising anyone on what to do. This is just my opinion of what the law says. If you think the law affects your situation, see a lawyer- this is not legal advice.
A few points of clarification:
1- In general, state or local laws can be stricter than federal law. However, if the federal government has legislated in a particular arena and has indicated in that legislation that they intend to preempt local law, then state or local law stricters than the federal law cannot legally be enforced. However, as indicated above, getting that ruling in your favor is not as simple as just pointing out the law. It really is a big deal.
2- When a state has a traffic code, local governments can make ordinances which are stricter. It could very well be that PA does not have a state law prohibiting riding a bicycle on the sidewalk, but local ordinances could prevent it. there is nothing wrong with that.
3- The federal law people have been referring to is 16 C.F.R. sec 1512.2 which states:
I just pulled that off of Westlaw.
The issue of the purpose of this definition remains. Is it to preempt state law? If so, is it meant to preempt state law specifically regarding the regulation of how and where such "bicycles" can be operated? That takes more work.
The answer to the first question, I believe, is "yes"- this law is intended to preempt state law. Under its power to regulate interstate commerce, Congress used its power to create the CPSC and delegated rulemaking authority to it. The first clue is in the legislation establishing the CPSC which was passed by Congress.
This seems to indicate that the purpose of the CPSC and the regulations it makes is to override state laws to enhance uniformity. This is classic preemption language. However, if there is preemption, there will be a more specific statute. Well, well, well, look at this:
Uh, oh- there is preemption, but a state may have a law which provides a "higher degree of protection" than the federal regulations- first problem....and a big one, but there is a more fundamental issue.
The bigger problem becomes clear when you look at the second question I asked above: "is [the federal regulation] meant to preempt state law specifically regarding the regulation of how and where such "bicycles" can be operated?"
All of these laws and regulation are in the context of product safety. None of them have anything to do with the circumstances under which the bicycle can be operated. In other words, the CPSC regulation above, 16 C.F.R. sec 1512.2 regulates the standards for the equipment a bicycle must have and the quality standards it must be built to. It requires that a low speed electric bicycle meet those standards rather than some other standards such as moped or motorcycle standards. However, the federal law giving the CPSC the power to make that regulation does not give power to set the traffic laws which must apply to the electric bicycle. States and municipalities may make their own laws in that regard and it would likely exceed federal authority under the Constitution for Congress or a federal agency to attempt to regulate that way.
Therefore, in my opinion, the federal law defining low-power electric bicycles as bicycles have nothing to do with whether one must have a license or must register the bicycle. Those issues are state or local law issues.
One caveat- certain states may, rather than make their own laws defining "bicycle", use the federal definition by reference. If a given state does that, then when the feds change their definition, that chage would automatically change that state law. However, i do not know what states, if any, has actually defined "bicycle" for traffic regulation purposes by reference to the CPSC standards.
A few points of clarification:
1- In general, state or local laws can be stricter than federal law. However, if the federal government has legislated in a particular arena and has indicated in that legislation that they intend to preempt local law, then state or local law stricters than the federal law cannot legally be enforced. However, as indicated above, getting that ruling in your favor is not as simple as just pointing out the law. It really is a big deal.
2- When a state has a traffic code, local governments can make ordinances which are stricter. It could very well be that PA does not have a state law prohibiting riding a bicycle on the sidewalk, but local ordinances could prevent it. there is nothing wrong with that.
3- The federal law people have been referring to is 16 C.F.R. sec 1512.2 which states:
I just pulled that off of Westlaw.
The issue of the purpose of this definition remains. Is it to preempt state law? If so, is it meant to preempt state law specifically regarding the regulation of how and where such "bicycles" can be operated? That takes more work.
The answer to the first question, I believe, is "yes"- this law is intended to preempt state law. Under its power to regulate interstate commerce, Congress used its power to create the CPSC and delegated rulemaking authority to it. The first clue is in the legislation establishing the CPSC which was passed by Congress.
This seems to indicate that the purpose of the CPSC and the regulations it makes is to override state laws to enhance uniformity. This is classic preemption language. However, if there is preemption, there will be a more specific statute. Well, well, well, look at this:
Uh, oh- there is preemption, but a state may have a law which provides a "higher degree of protection" than the federal regulations- first problem....and a big one, but there is a more fundamental issue.
The bigger problem becomes clear when you look at the second question I asked above: "is [the federal regulation] meant to preempt state law specifically regarding the regulation of how and where such "bicycles" can be operated?"
All of these laws and regulation are in the context of product safety. None of them have anything to do with the circumstances under which the bicycle can be operated. In other words, the CPSC regulation above, 16 C.F.R. sec 1512.2 regulates the standards for the equipment a bicycle must have and the quality standards it must be built to. It requires that a low speed electric bicycle meet those standards rather than some other standards such as moped or motorcycle standards. However, the federal law giving the CPSC the power to make that regulation does not give power to set the traffic laws which must apply to the electric bicycle. States and municipalities may make their own laws in that regard and it would likely exceed federal authority under the Constitution for Congress or a federal agency to attempt to regulate that way.
Therefore, in my opinion, the federal law defining low-power electric bicycles as bicycles have nothing to do with whether one must have a license or must register the bicycle. Those issues are state or local law issues.
One caveat- certain states may, rather than make their own laws defining "bicycle", use the federal definition by reference. If a given state does that, then when the feds change their definition, that chage would automatically change that state law. However, i do not know what states, if any, has actually defined "bicycle" for traffic regulation purposes by reference to the CPSC standards.
