A group of lawmakers in Annapolis wants to reimagine how police departments handle low-level traffic violations by cutting down the number of offenses that would justify pulling over a driver — a proposal that has law enforcement up in arms.

The bill would reclassify some traffic violations as “secondary” offenses, meaning that they alone would not be enough for a police officer to pull over a driver. The violations include improper vehicle registration, failing to signal a turn, a broken headlight or taillight, and littering.

These traffic rules could still be enforced, but police would need to see a “primary” offense, such as speeding or reckless driving, to pull a driver over. Supporters say law enforcement agencies could also use technology like license plate readers to adopt less invasive enforcement procedures, such as sending a ticket in the mail.

“I think sometimes people get used to things being done one way, and they don’t know how to imagine it differently,” said Sen. Charles Sydnor, a Baltimore County Democrat who sponsored the legislation in the Maryland Senate.

Sydnor said he wanted the bill to start a conversation about policing in Maryland. It certainly has.

A day before the bill’s first hearing in Annapolis, the Harford County Sheriff’s Office posted a video on Facebook lambasting the proposal. The video was viewed 1.7 million times and provoked intense backlash to the bill, both on social media and in lawmakers’ inboxes.

The video suggests that police officers would be powerless to take action in response to a variety of traffic violations, including driving without headlights turned on.

Del. N. Scott Phillips, a Baltimore County Democrat who sponsored the House version of the bill, acknowledged there are ambiguities in the legislation and said he expects some amendments, including clarifying that driving without any headlights would still justify a traffic stop. The legislation could be adjusted to make clear that only a single broken headlight or taillight is a secondary offense, though Phillips said he is still examining the issue.

“We want to make sure that we maintain safety on the roads,” he said. “At the same time, we want to make sure people experience safe and fair and just enforcement of traffic laws.”

Phillips also said he would like to adopt a three-month grace period for expired vehicle registration, so that recently expired registration alone isn’t enough for a traffic stop.

Registration-related offenses were given as the reason for nearly 25% of traffic stops in Maryland in 2023, according to data from the Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy.

At last week’s hearing before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, opponents framed the legislation as an attack on law enforcement. Under the bill, police officers could be subject to administrative disciplinary action if they didn’t comply with the law, and any evidence gleaned from an improper traffic stop would be inadmissible in court.

The Maryland Department of State Police said it would “advise its troopers to stop making traffic stops because of the risk of administrative sanctions, including termination,” according to the bill’s fiscal note.

Baltimore County State’s Attorney Scott Shellenberger raised a hypothetical: If a police officer pulled over a driver for a broken left turn signal and found a gun, the gun would not be admissible in court and the police officer could be brought up on administrative charges, he said.

“This is not a law that we need,” he said. “It’s going to be a danger to the public.”

“Here we go again,” said Clyde Boatwright, the president of the Maryland Fraternal Order of Police. “We’re back to police reform,” he said, referencing the legislature’s sweeping 2021 policing package that repealed the Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights and established new requirements for police discipline.

Sydnor said he welcomes the robust discussion.

“Sometimes you put in some legislation that’s going to push some boundaries in order to have these conversations,” he said.

The bill’s supporters say it would protect both drivers and police officers. A 2017 study by the U.S. Department of Justice found that traffic stops are the most common proactive policing measure preceding officer fatalities.

Criminal justice reform advocates also say the bill would help address the ongoing racial disparities in Maryland traffic stops and pretextual stops, where police use a minor traffic violation to justify searching for evidence of an unrelated crime.

A 2020 study of nearly 100 million traffic stops across the United States found that police’s decisions to stop and search drivers “suffer from persistent racial bias.” The study found that Black drivers, for example, were less likely to be pulled over after sunset, when the darkness made it harder for police officers to see their race.

“Truth is, almost every African American or Latino Marylander can tell a story about being pulled over by the police for no apparent reason other than the color of their skin,” said Maryland Public Defender Natasha Dartigue, whose office is supporting the bill.

Sydnor said none of the bill’s opponents have a good response to the state data, which shows 43% of traffic stops across Maryland in 2023 involved Black drivers, though Black residents make up less than 32% of the state’s population.

The disparities are more stark in some jurisdictions: In Baltimore, Black drivers are involved in nearly 80% of traffic stops, though they make up about 60% of the city’s population. In Harford County, where the sheriff’s office shared the video opposing the bill, Black residents make up just 16% of the population but nearly 43% of traffic stops in 2023.

A spokesperson for the Harford County Sheriff’s office said Sheriff Jeff Gahler was unavailable for an interview because he was attending the National Sheriff’s Association Winter Conference, where he sits on the Border Security Committee.

Sydnor said many people who commented on the bill after watching the video have argued that following the law is the best way to avoid traffic stops. But that criticism doesn’t acknowledge the problem of racial bias and pretextual stops, Sydnor said.

“That may work for you, but that doesn’t work for people that look like me all the time,” said Sydnor, who is Black. The proposal is also one of the Legislative Black Caucus’s priority bills this session.

The bill will have a hearing before the House of Delegates Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.