23 U.S.C. § 161

Operation of motor vehicles by intoxicated minors

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 23 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)Withholding of Apportionments for Noncompliance.—(1)Prior to fiscal year 2012.—The Secretary shall withhold 10 percent (including any amounts withheld under paragraph (1)) of the amount required to be apportioned to any State under each of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of section 104(b) 11 See References in Text note below. on October 1, 1999, and on October 1 of each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2011, if the State does not meet the requirement of paragraph (3) on that date.(2)Fiscal year 2012 and thereafter.—The Secretary shall withhold an amount equal to 8 percent of the amount required to be apportioned to any State under each of paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 104(b) on October 1, 2011, and on October 1 of each fiscal year thereafter, if the State does not meet the requirement of paragraph (3) on that date.(3)Requirement.—A State meets the requirement of this paragraph if the State has enacted and is enforcing a law that considers an individual under the age of 21 who has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.02 percent or greater while operating a motor vehicle in the State to be driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence of alcohol.(b)Period of Availability; Effect of Compliance and Noncompliance.—(1)Period of availability of withheld funds.—(A)Funds withheld on or before september 30, 2000.—Any funds withheld under subsection (a) from apportionment to any State on or before September 30, 2000, shall remain available until the end of the third fiscal year following the fiscal year for which the funds are authorized to be appropriated.(B)Funds withheld after september 30, 2000.—No funds withheld under this section from apportionment to any State after September 30, 2000, shall be available for apportionment to the State.(2)Apportionment of withheld funds after compliance.—If, before the last day of the period for which funds withheld under subsection (a) from apportionment are to remain available for apportionment to a State under paragraph (1), the State meets the requirement of subsection (a)(3), the Secretary shall, on the first day on which the State meets the requirement, apportion to the State the funds withheld under subsection (a) that remain available for apportionment to the State.(3)Period of availability of subsequently apportioned funds.—Any funds apportioned pursuant to paragraph (2) shall remain available for expenditure until the end of the third fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the funds are so apportioned. Sums not obligated at the end of that period shall lapse.(4)Effect of noncompliance.—If, at the end of the period for which funds withheld under subsection (a) from apportionment are available for apportionment to a State under paragraph (1), the State does not meet the requirement of subsection (a)(3), the funds shall lapse.(Added Pub. L. 104–59, title III, § 320(a), Nov. 28, 1995, 109 Stat. 589; amended Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1103(l)(3)(F), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 126; Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1404(h), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 559.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 104, referred to in subsec. (a)(1), was amended generally by Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1105(a), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 427.

Amendments

2012—Subsec. (a)(1), (2). Pub. L. 112–141 redesignated par. (2) as (1), substituted “Prior to fiscal year 2012” for “Thereafter” in par. heading, inserted “through fiscal year 2011” after “each fiscal year thereafter” in text, added par. (2), and struck out former par. (1). Prior to amendment, text of par. (1) read as follows: “The Secretary shall withhold 5 percent of the amount required to be apportioned to any State under each of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of section 104(b) on October 1, 1998, if the State does not meet the requirement of paragraph (3) on that date.”

1998—Subsec. (a)(1), (2). Pub. L. 105–178 substituted “paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of section 104(b)” for “paragraphs (1), (3), and (5)(B) of section 104(b)”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2012 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 112–141 effective Oct. 1, 2012, see section 3(a) of Pub. L. 112–141, set out as an Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment note under section 101 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1999–2019 · leading case: Durham v. Martin, 388 F. Supp. 3d 919 (M.D. Tenn. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Durham v. Martin, 388 F. Supp. 3d 919 (M.D. Tenn. 2019). “As set forth in the proclamation, the purpose of the special session was to "[c]onsider[ ] and act[ ] upon legislation necessary to ensure that Tennessee law prohibiting an individual under the age of 21 from operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated or under the influence of…”

State v. Schuster, 46 P.3d 1140 (Kan. 2002). · cites it 2× “The opinion states: “The Kansas Legislature took up the issue of ‘zero tolerance’ in the 1996 Session in order to satisfy the federal requirement set forth in the National Highway System Designation Act, now codified at 23 U.S.C.A. § 161 (a)(3). This federal statute requires…”

Jolly v. State, 858 So. 2d 305 (Ala. Crim. App. 2002). “1999), the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals stated: "[The United States] Congress call[ed] for an under-twenty-one age distinction in the law, when, in 23 U.S.C.A. § 161 (a)(3), of the [Federal Highway Safety] Act, it state[d]: "`Requirement.”

Mason v. State, 781 So. 2d 99 (Miss. 2000). “Thus, Congress calls for an under-twenty-one age distinction in the law, when in 23 U.S.C.A. § 161 (a)(3), of the Act, it states: RequirementA State meets the requirement of this paragraph if the State has enacted and is enforcing a law that considers an individual under the…”

Collins v. State Ex Rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 1999 OK CIV APP 107 (Okla. Civ. App. 1999). “Thus, Congress calls for an under-twenty-one age distinction in the law, when, in 23 U.S.C.A. § 161 (a)(3), of the Act, it states: Requirement.”

Durham v. Martin, 287 F. Supp. 3d 683 (M.D. Tenn. 2017). “As set forth in the proclamation, the purpose of the special session was to "[c]onsider[ ] and act[ ] upon legislation necessary to ensure that Tennessee law prohibiting an individual under the age of 21 from operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated or under the influence of…”

Michael Dale Mason v. State of Mississippi (Miss. 1999). “Thus, Congress calls for an under- twenty-one age distinction in the law, when in 23 U.S.C.A. § 161 (a)(3), of the Act, it states: Requirement - A State meets the requirement of this paragraph if the State has enacted and is enforcing a law that considers an individual under the…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.