In a letter sent Monday to all 50 governors, the mayor of Washington, DC, and the governor of Puerto Rico, US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy called for the removal of “politically charged and distracting displays” on public roads, including rainbow-painted crosswalks and street slogans such as “Black Lives Matter.”
The directive, issued July 1 as part of the Federal Highway Administration’s SAFE ROADS initiative, frames the call for removal as a matter of public safety. Duffy pointed to 39,345 traffic fatalities in 2024 as justification for eliminating what the department terms nonstandard and potentially distracting markings from arterial roads and intersections.
“Roads are for safety, not political messages or artwork. Today I am calling on governors in every state to ensure that roadways, intersections, and crosswalks are kept free of distractions,” Duffy wrote. “Far too many Americans die each year to traffic fatalities to take our eye off the ball. USDOT stands ready to help communities across the country make their roads safer and easier to navigate.”
The SAFE ROADS Program Goals include:
- Get back to basics – use data-driven decisions and target safety and mobility investments.
- Empower states and local governments to simplify and improve roadway environments.
- Make roads safer and easier to navigate for pedestrians, vehicle operators, and automated vehicles.
He asked states and territories to submit within 60 days a list of intersections and roadway segments where these displays exist, prioritizing areas with elevated crash rates. The letter set a goal of addressing those safety concerns by the end of Fiscal Year 2026.
The request has sparked a nationwide debate. Supporters argue that the move restores uniformity and prioritizes safety on public streets. Critics, however, say the directive amounts to federal overreach and targets displays that symbolize inclusion and civil rights.
Some municipalities have signaled resistance. Atlanta city officials indicated this week that the federal government does not have jurisdiction over most city streets and has limited authority to compel changes to non-federally funded infrastructure.
The painting of crosswalks with rainbows has led to some drivers doing burnouts on the paint. This has resulted in new ordinances that crack down on that behavior. In Kirkland, Wash., drivers have been charged with malicious mischief. In Spokane, three teens riding electric scooters were charged with felonies after leaving skid marks on Spokane’s Pride crosswalk. The city had also experienced earlier vandalism and even arson attempts. In Canada, one jurisdiction has treated these skid-mark incidences as hate crimes.
In Juneau, guerrilla painters painted rainbow colors on a crosswalk on Front Street in 2016, and the city later sanctioned the rainbow crosswalk and now repaints it annually, with paint and labor paid for by the Juneau Arts and Humanities Council. It is occasionally subjected to skid marks. There have been unauthorized guerrilla paintings of rainbow crosswalk at 7th and Gold St., which the city has repainted white. The Juneau crosswalk is not a federal highway and is likely unaffected by this advisory letter or subsequent federal funding decisions that could adversely impact states and cities.
The SAFE ROADS program, launched earlier this year by the Department of Transportation, aims to reduce traffic fatalities through infrastructure improvements, enhanced enforcement strategies, and stricter adherence to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which sets the standards for road markings and signage nationwide.
While the Department’s letter does not carry the force of law, it signals a tightening stance on what the federal government considers visual distractions in public right-of-ways. It remains to be seen how states and localities will respond, or whether legal challenges will arise in defense of political messages on the road surface.
Charged with felonies for leaving skid marks with electric scooters? Yet you can protest, burn buildings, stop traffic, and loot with zero consequences. Yup, makes perfect sense.
Seems harsh, but it is normal for law enforcement to charge for harsher crimes for the accused to then plead down to lesser charges. This is in WA. For this crime the “act must be done with an “evil intent, wish, or design to vex, annoy, or injure another person”. ” In this case while they were spinning out they directed some foul language at a witness (vexing intent seems obvious). The act also must damage property of interfere with public services. In this case, this is part of a street art program so there is property damage. The third part is the person must know they are causing the damage or interference. In this case it is pretty clear form the video evidence that the damage is intentional-they were spinning out, not having an accident.
What is left is what are the damages? Over $5,000 is is a Class B State felony. Over $750 is a Class B. Under $750 no jail, just a fine.
IRONIC here is that most MRAK coomenteress think shoplifter should face significant jail time for crimes inkling small amounts of money.
Missing the point completely. Crosswalks are MUTCD safety devices designed to be easily and universally recognized, not billboards for social messaging. Modifying them with gay pride messaging that is designed to inflame is absolutely inappropriate.
Should localities begin replacing crosswalks with Bible verses and crosses? All pedestrians and drivers could receive the benefits of religious messaging whenever crossing the road. Sure, the wording would be a distraction and would interfere with the safety purpose intended, but why not flex on the non-religious? When annoyed leftist atheists or Muslims began vandalizing “The Lord’s Prayer” re-imagined as a traffic safety device – we could hammer them with hate crime charges and lock them up.
And why stop with religious messaging? We could insert Confederate symbols to bait BLM types into committing felonies and increase black incarceration rates, or sell crosswalk ‘art’ rights to corporate McAdvertisers.
I prefer engineering traffic standards not being bent to push social causes. If DONT/WALK signs had to be retired in the 90’s because they were ‘confusing’ to non-English speakers – we shouldn’t be eroding these same standards to push woke agendas.
Good. Maybe this can be the first step in ending this virtue signaling once and for all.
Let’s see how the radical sexually deviant maoists react if a “DeusVolt” symbol or New Testament Bible verse is painted in an intersection
“IRONIC here is that most MRAK coomenteress think shoplifter should face significant jail time for crimes inkling small amounts of money”.
Yes and they should. unless you like paying these high grocery prices because of products that others steal and the stores have to raise their prices to make up the loss resulting in YOU paying higher prices…..I work in a store, I find blister packs of expensive items as well as wrappers from things they steal and even eat in the store. with these weak laws we now have theft has run rampant in stores.