Elon Musk’s latest pitch for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software suggests drivers can safely text while the car handles the road, but traffic laws have not caught up to that promise. Across the United States and in other major markets, statutes still treat anyone behind the wheel as the responsible driver, regardless of how advanced the assistance system might be.
That gap between what the technology can do and what the law allows is now at the center of a high-stakes debate over safety, liability, and how far drivers can trust automation when their eyes and hands are off the task of driving.
What Musk is really promising with Tesla FSD
When Elon Musk Claims Tesla can let drivers text while its latest Full Self-Driving software manages the trip, he is selling a vision of driving where the car takes over the boring parts and the human can focus on their phone. In practice, that means a driver in a Model 3 or Model Y might feel free to tap out messages in iMessage or WhatsApp while the vehicle accelerates, brakes, and steers on city streets and highways. The pitch is that the new FSD can handle enough of the workload that glancing down at a screen feels no more dangerous than letting cruise control manage speed on an empty interstate.
That framing glosses over the fact that the system Musk calls FSD is still classified as driver assistance, not autonomy, and that the person in the driver’s seat remains legally responsible for what the car does. Even as Elon Musk Claims Tesla, FSD, Update Lets You Text While Driving This, the underlying software still expects the human to supervise, intervene when traffic gets complicated, and take over instantly if the system disengages or misreads a situation, which is a very different reality from the hands-off, mind-off experience implied by the marketing.
State laws still treat phone use as distracted driving
However capable Tesla FSD might be in ideal conditions, it does not rewrite the traffic code. In the United States, State laws prohibit texting while driving in nearly every jurisdiction, and those bans are written broadly enough that they apply to anyone sitting behind the wheel of a moving vehicle, regardless of whether an automated system is engaged. In many places, the statutes do not distinguish between tapping out a text, scrolling Instagram, or composing an email, they simply bar handheld phone use while the car is in motion.
Legal analysis of Tesla’s FSD Update Sparks Legal Debate by Allowing Texting While Driving makes the point bluntly: Is texting while driving with Tesla FSD legal? No, it is not legal, because State lawmakers have not carved out any exception for semi-automated driving. Even where the rules focus specifically on texting, rather than broader smartphone use, the prohibition still kicks in as soon as the vehicle is on a public road and in gear, which means a driver who follows Musk’s suggestion and texts while FSD is active is still violating the law.
Police and regulators are not making exceptions
Law enforcement agencies are not waiting for a new generation of cars to rewrite how they enforce distracted driving. State police officials say there are no legal carve-outs that allow drivers to use their phones behind the wheel simply because a driver-assistance system is active, and that remains true even for sophisticated systems like Tesla FSD. Patrol officers are trained to look for eyes-down behavior, phones in hands, and erratic lane position, and they are empowered to issue citations whenever they see those signs, regardless of what the car’s software is doing.
Reporting on Elon Musk Claims Tesla’s FSD Update Lets You Text While Driving underscores that some State laws ban any handheld phone use while driving, while others specifically prohibit texting, but in both cases the statutes do not make an exception for semi-autonomous cars. From a regulator’s perspective, the driver is still the operator of the vehicle, and the presence of automation is no defense if a crash occurs or if an officer spots a driver composing a message at a stoplight that has just turned green.
Why distracted driving laws still apply to Autopilot and FSD
The legal system has already had a preview of this conflict in earlier Tesla software updates. When Tesla enabled in-car gaming features that could be used while a vehicle was moving, safety advocates pointed out that Distracted Driving Laws and Autopilot Cars Distracted driving statutes apply to all drivers, no matter if an autopilot system is engaged. In other words, the law focuses on the human’s attention, not on whether the car can technically steer itself for a stretch of road.
Attorneys who track these cases emphasize that distracted driving is prohibited to anyone sitting behind the wheel, even if the vehicle is using advanced driver assistance. That means a driver in a Tesla Model S who is playing a video game or composing a text while Autopilot or FSD is active is still exposed to the same fines, points, and potential criminal liability as someone doing the same thing in a conventional sedan. The software may reduce workload, but it does not erase the legal duty to keep eyes on the road and hands ready to intervene.
Tesla’s own fine print undercuts the texting pitch
Even Tesla’s internal messaging does not fully match Musk’s public bravado. In its manuals and on-screen warnings, Tesla, FSD documentation stresses that the system is not autonomous and that the driver must remain attentive at all times. The company instructs owners to keep their hands on the wheel and be prepared to take over immediately, which is hard to reconcile with the idea of casually texting through a complex urban commute.
One analysis of Tesla FSD Now Allows Texting While Driving notes that Tesla’s own documentation warns drivers to keep hands on the wheel even with FSD engaged, making them legally liable for any crash or violation that occurs. At the same time, the latest software green-lights phone usage under certain traffic conditions by handling more of the driving task, creating a mixed message where the marketing suggests freedom while the legal disclaimers quietly remind drivers that they will be the ones facing a citation or lawsuit if something goes wrong.
Safety experts: no driver-assistance system is truly autonomous
Safety researchers and legal experts are nearly unanimous on one point: no consumer driver-assistance system on the road today is fully autonomous. Analyses of Tesla’s FSD Update Sparks Legal Debate by Allowing Texting While Driving stress that They emphasize that no driver-assistance system is fully autonomous and that Drivers must always be ready to take control instantly, because the software can misinterpret traffic signals, road markings, or the behavior of other road users. That is not a theoretical concern, it is grounded in dozens of reports concerning traffic light violations and other near misses when FSD or similar systems misjudged a situation.
Those warnings are not unique to Tesla. Legal commentary on Even, Tesla, FSD in Australia notes that Tesla insists that FSD does not make the vehicle autonomous and requires “a fully attentive driver who is ready to take immediate action at all times,” language that mirrors the disclaimers used in the United States. When the manufacturer itself tells owners that the system cannot be trusted to handle every scenario, it becomes difficult to argue that the same owners should feel comfortable diverting their attention to a smartphone while the car is in motion.
How global law treats Tesla FSD and Autopilot
The legal tension around FSD is not confined to American highways. In Australia, consumer law specialists have examined whether it is legal to use Tesla Autopilot and FSD on public roads and have reached similarly cautious conclusions. Their reading of Even, Tesla, FSD guidance is that, even with the most advanced software enabled, the person in the driver’s seat remains the responsible operator, and any suggestion that the car can drive itself is tempered by Tesla’s own insistence that a fully attentive driver must be ready to take immediate action at all times.
That approach mirrors how European regulators treat advanced driver assistance: they may allow lane-keeping and adaptive cruise control, but they still hold the human accountable for speeding, red light violations, and collisions. In practice, that means a Tesla owner in Sydney or Berlin who decides to text while FSD is active is taking on the same legal risk as a driver in California, even if the local statutes use slightly different language to define distracted driving or handheld device use.
The marketing gap: what drivers hear versus what the law says
The clash between Musk’s messaging and legal reality creates a dangerous gray zone for drivers. When Elon Musk, Tesla, Full Self promotions highlight that the car can manage city streets, respond to traffic lights, and even navigate complex intersections, many owners understandably infer that the system is capable enough to let them look away for a few seconds. The suggestion that they can text while the car drives only reinforces that perception, even if the fine print and the law say otherwise.
Coverage of Elon Musk claims new Tesla software permits texting while driving despite bans in US states notes that Elon Musk has said that Tesla owners can text while driving when using the latest version of the company’s Full Self software, even though handheld phone use is prohibited in nearly every US state. That disconnect leaves drivers caught between a charismatic CEO telling them the car can handle it and a legal framework that still treats any phone use behind the wheel as a violation, with insurance companies and courts likely to side with the written law rather than the marketing slogan if a crash occurs.
Why this debate matters for the future of automation
The argument over texting with FSD is about more than one controversial feature, it is a test case for how society will handle the next wave of automation on public roads. If drivers come to believe that software can shoulder the full burden of driving while the law continues to hold them personally responsible, the result will be confusion, inconsistent enforcement, and, in the worst cases, preventable crashes. The stakes are particularly high for Tesla, which has built its brand around pushing the limits of what driver-assistance can do while still insisting that owners remain in charge.
Legal experts who track Tesla’s FSD Update Sparks Legal Debate by Allowing Texting While Driving warn that until lawmakers rewrite distracted driving statutes to account for varying levels of automation, the safest and most legally sound approach is to treat FSD as a helpful assistant, not a replacement driver. That means keeping phones out of hand, eyes on the road, and hands close to the wheel, even when the car seems to be doing a flawless job of piloting itself through traffic. Anything less is not just risky, it is, as current State laws make clear, still illegal.
More from MorningOverview