Congress is moving to rein in the sleek, flush door handles that helped define the Tesla look, arguing that design has gone too far at the expense of basic safety. The Securing Accessible Functional Emergency Exit Act, or SAFE Exit Act, would force automakers to pair electronic releases with simple, obvious mechanical ways to open a car, even when power fails. At its core, the fight is about whether a modern vehicle should ever leave occupants or rescuers guessing how to get a door open when seconds matter.
How the SAFE Exit Act was born
The SAFE Exit Act began with a straightforward premise: if you are trapped in a crashed or burning vehicle, you should not need a tutorial to find the door handle. In WASHINGTON, Today, U.S. Rep. Robin Kelly of Illinois introduced the bill after hearing repeated accounts of drivers and first responders struggling with hidden or power dependent releases on electric vehicles, particularly Teslas. Her proposal would set a federal standard for electric vehicle doors so that every passenger has an intuitive, mechanical way out, regardless of software or battery status, according to Rep. Robin Kelly.
Kelly’s office has framed the measure as a response to specific tragedies, not a theoretical risk. Advocates point to at least 15 people who have died in car crashes where Tesla doors reportedly did not open in time, a figure cited by supporters of the SAFE Exit Act in their push to mandate accessible manual releases on new vehicles, as detailed in US Congress. In a separate description of the proposal, Kelly’s team underscored that the bill is meant to create a clear, uniform standard for electric vehicle doors nationwide, a point reiterated in a January 6 statement from Rep. Robin Kelly.
What the bill would actually require
At its heart, the SAFE Exit Act is less about banning technology and more about forcing a low tech backup into every design. The proposal would direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to write rules that require easy to find manual door releases, inside and outside, on all new motor vehicles, with particular emphasis on electric models that rely heavily on electronic latches. Supporters say the agency would be tasked with defining what counts as “intuitive,” but the baseline is clear: a person unfamiliar with the car should be able to locate and operate the handle in an emergency, a requirement described in detail by Congressional summaries.
The bill would not outlaw electronic handles outright, but it would sharply limit designs that hide or de emphasize mechanical backups. One analysis notes that the measure instructs the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to ensure that manual releases remain accessible even when a vehicle loses power unexpectedly, including after crashes, a scenario highlighted in coverage of the New US Automotive. Consumer advocates stress that the law would also apply to exterior access, so firefighters and bystanders can open doors quickly without hunting for hidden buttons, a point echoed in a detailed explainer on While the proposed law.
Why Tesla’s design is in the crosshairs
Tesla is not the only automaker using electronic door releases, but its flush, retractable handles have become the most visible symbol of the trend. Congress Has a Problem With Tesla’s Door Handles, and lawmakers have zeroed in on how the company’s early Model S and Model X designs required power to present or unlatch the handles, a choice critics say can turn deadly if systems fail after a collision. Safety advocates argue that when Congress Has a Problem With Tesla’s Door Handles and calls it a Big One, they are really challenging an industry wide shift that began with Tesla and soon other EV makers followed, as described in a policy focused analysis of Congress Has.
Supporters of the SAFE Exit Act say the problem is not just that the handles are different, but that they are counterintuitive in a crisis. At least 15 People Have Died in incidents where Tesla Door Handles Outlawed in Proposed Federal Bill are blamed for slowing escape or rescue, according to advocates who back the measure and cite cases where first responders could not open the doors in time to rescue occupants, a claim laid out in detail in coverage of the People Have Died figure. Although Tesla has updated some models to include more obvious interior pulls, critics argue that the brand’s influence helped normalize electronic only thinking, a point underscored in a report noting that Although Tesla is best known for these door handles, it is not the only manufacturer that puts electronic door releases front and center, a trend that regulators say must finally catch up to reality, as described in Although Tesla.
Beyond Tesla: a broader EV safety reckoning
Although the SAFE Exit Act is framed around Tesla, the bill would sweep in a wide range of electric and conventional vehicles that rely on electronic latches. A U.S. lawmaker is proposing legislation that would require manual door releases in new cars across the board, not just in high end EVs, according to a summary of the New US Automotive initiative. The measure would also push regulators to examine how advanced driver assistance systems interact with door locks, including whether features like Tesla’s Autopilot or Full Self Driving could ever leave doors in a locked state that complicates escape, a concern raised in reporting that notes Her Securing Accessible Functional Emergency Exit Act, or SAFE, would require manual releases and prompt a review of Tesla’s Driving system for potential defects, as described in a detailed piece on the Securing Accessible Functional.
Industry groups have warned that redesigning door systems could add cost and complexity, but safety advocates counter that the technology already exists and is widely used. One analysis notes that while some luxury brands have experimented with pop out handles and touch sensitive pads, many still retain simple mechanical levers that work even when the battery is dead, a contrast that supporters say proves the SAFE Exit Act is not anti innovation, just pro redundancy, a point echoed in coverage of the Tesla Door Design debate. I see this as part of a broader reckoning over how far automakers can push minimalist design before regulators insist on analog backups for critical safety functions.
What happens next for the SAFE Exit Act
The SAFE Exit Act now heads into a familiar Washington gauntlet of committee hearings, industry lobbying, and potential amendments. US Congress introduces SAFE Exit Act targeting Tesla door handles after claiming 15 deaths, and the proposal has already drawn attention from both safety advocates and automakers that rely on electronic releases, as described in an early overview of SAFE Exit Act dynamics. While the bill’s backers argue that the moral case is clear, they still need to translate public concern into a bipartisan coalition willing to tell carmakers that aesthetics and aerodynamics cannot trump the ability to open a door in a fire.
Advocates are already trying to shape that debate by emphasizing that the law does not ban innovation, it simply insists on a floor for safety. While the bill does not call for banning electronic door handles outright, if enacted, it would instruct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to set clear rules for intuitive manual releases, a framework that is endorsed by Consumer Reports and other safety groups, according to a detailed breakdown of the Proposed Law. I expect the fiercest arguments to center not on whether people should be able to escape a crashed car, but on how prescriptive Congress should be about the exact shape, placement, and labeling of the handles that make that escape possible, a tension already visible in early commentary that notes Jan lawmakers have been complaining for years about confusing electronic releases and now say we must ensure people’s safety, as summarized in a report on Jan.
More from Morning Overview