Pennsylvania's 'Paul Miller's Law' Takes Effect: Handheld Phones Now Banned Behind the Wheel

Pennsylvania's long-debated hands-free driving statute is now in force. Known as Paul Miller's Law, the measure makes it illegal to hold or support a phone or similar device while driving anywhere on a Pennsylvania highway. The prohibition took effect on June 5, 2025.

The law was enacted as Act 18 of 2024 (P.L. 366), signed by Governor Josh Shapiro on June 5, 2024. It amends Pennsylvania's Vehicle Code (Title 75) and adds a new section, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3316.1, prohibiting use of an interactive mobile device while driving.

Information last verified on June 20, 2026.

What the Statute Actually Says

The core rule is short. Under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3316.1(a), "no driver shall use an interactive mobile device while driving a motor vehicle," with a narrow exception for emergency communications to law enforcement or emergency services.

The Act defines an interactive mobile device broadly. Under the amended definitions in 75 Pa.C.S. § 102, it covers a handheld wireless telephone, personal digital assistant, smartphone, portable or mobile computer, or similar device capable of voice communication, texting, emailing, internet browsing, instant messaging, gaming, image capture, video recording, and social media use.

The statute spells out what counts as prohibited use. It includes using at least one hand to hold, or supporting with another part of the body, an interactive mobile device; dialing or answering by pressing more than a single button; and reaching for a device in a manner that requires the driver to move out of a proper seated, seat-belted driving position.

That last clause matters because it reaches a behavior that did not require any texting at all. The driver in the crash that prompted the law was reaching for a phone, not typing on it.

Penalties and the Warning Window

The penalty structure was deliberately gradual. Under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3316.1(g), for the first 12 months after the effective date a driver who violates the ban may only be issued a written warning. That warning-only window ran from June 5, 2025 to June 5, 2026.

Starting June 5, 2026, the offense carries real consequences. The violation is graded as a summary offense, and under § 3316.1(c) the fine on conviction is $50, plus the court costs and fees that attach to any summary traffic citation in Pennsylvania.

The $50 base fine is modest compared with the law's deterrent ambition. The more significant exposure for a distracted driver is not the ticket. It is what a phone-use violation can mean in a serious crash, both criminally and in a civil lawsuit.

The Sentencing Enhancements

Act 18 did more than create a new traffic ticket. It also amended Pennsylvania's serious traffic-offense statutes to add penalties when a phone is involved in a deadly or injurious crash.

For homicide by vehicle under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3732, a conviction that also involves a § 3316.1 violation permits an additional term of confinement not to exceed five years. For aggravated assault by vehicle under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3732.1, a related § 3316.1 violation permits an additional term not to exceed two years.

Those enhancements signal that Pennsylvania now treats handheld phone use as an aggravating factor in the most serious crashes, not just a standalone infraction. They also give prosecutors a concrete statutory hook tied to phone use rather than to general recklessness.

A Second, Separate Provision: Traffic-Stop Data

The same Act carried an unrelated but notable reform. Under 75 Pa.C.S. § 6329, law enforcement officers must collect data on traffic stops, including the reason for the stop, the driver's perceived race or ethnicity, gender, and age, whether a search occurred and on what basis, the result of any search, and the enforcement action taken.

Local departments are to transmit that information to the Pennsylvania State Police or a designated analyst, which then publishes findings on a publicly accessible website. That data-collection mandate was set to take effect roughly 18 months after enactment, later than the phone ban itself.

The pairing was a legislative compromise. Lawmakers attached the traffic-stop transparency requirement to the hands-free measure so the two moved together.

Why Pennsylvania Acted

The law is named for Paul Miller Jr., who was killed in 2010 in Monroe County when a distracted tractor-trailer driver reaching for a phone crossed into his lane. His mother, Eileen Miller, spent more than a decade advocating for the change.

The scale of the problem is documented in state crash data. According to PennDOT, there were more than 11,000 crashes involving a distracted driver in Pennsylvania in 2023, including dozens of fatalities and hundreds of suspected serious injuries.

With enactment, Pennsylvania joined the majority of states that restrict handheld phone use behind the wheel. The prime sponsor in the Senate was Senator Rosemary Brown.

How This Connects to Crash Liability

For anyone trying to understand fault after a wreck, a hands-free statute changes the analysis. A driver who was holding a phone in violation of § 3316.1 has, by definition, broken a traffic law at the moment of the crash. That is the kind of fact that shapes a negligence claim.

State-specific rules still control how fault and damages are calculated, which is why crash outcomes differ so much by jurisdiction. Our overview of car accident laws explains the building blocks that apply across states, including fault systems, insurance duties, and how a traffic violation factors into a claim.

For a sense of how those rules vary, compare a comparative-fault, fault-based liability state like Ohio with a no-fault personal injury protection state like Utah. The Ohio car accident laws page walks through that state's at-fault framework, while Utah car accident laws cover Utah's no-fault PIP system and the threshold a victim must meet to step outside it.

Analysis: Why This Matters

The following analysis reflects the views of the Recording Law Editorial Team.

The headline feature of Paul Miller's Law is the handheld ban, but the more durable change may be the sentencing enhancements. A $50 fine is unlikely to alter behavior on its own. Tying phone use to additional confinement in homicide-by-vehicle and aggravated-assault-by-vehicle cases is a sharper instrument, because it raises the stakes precisely where the harm is greatest.

The enhancements also matter outside the courtroom. In a civil case, evidence that a driver was holding a phone in violation of a clear statute is powerful. Many states recognize that violating a safety statute can be treated as evidence of negligence, and a bright-line hands-free rule makes that evidence easier to establish than a vague accusation of inattention.

The staged rollout was sensible policy. A 12-month warning period gave drivers time to adjust their habits before tickets started, which tends to improve both compliance and public acceptance. The tradeoff is that real enforcement only began in mid-2026, so it will take time before crash data can show whether the law moved the needle.

The traffic-stop data provision is worth watching for a different reason. Hands-free laws are typically enforced as primary offenses, meaning an officer can stop a driver for the phone alone. Pairing that enforcement power with mandatory demographic reporting is an acknowledgment that broad stop authority needs transparency to go with it. Whether the published data gets meaningful scrutiny will say a lot about how seriously the reform is taken.

None of this is legal advice. Anyone facing a citation or a crash claim under the new law should consult a licensed Pennsylvania attorney about their specific situation.