An Uber-backed ballot initiative, as well as a counter initiative, are on track to appear in front of voters on the November ballot
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California voters could face two competing ballot measures tied to rideshare giant Uber in the November 2026 election, setting up a high-stakes fight over passenger safety and legal limits in accident cases.
The company is backing a proposal called the “Preventing Accident Victims from Self-Dealing Attorneys Act,” which would cap attorney fees in auto accident cases at 25%. Supporters say the change would lower costs for consumers and ensure more money goes to victims.
But that effort is drawing sharp opposition from the group Alliance Against Corporate Abuse, which is advancing a countermeasure focused on sexual assault prevention in rideshare services. AACA initially had three countermeasures to oppose Uber’s efforts, but spokesperson Alex Stack tells ABC10 the group is now just focused on one seeking to protect sexual assault victims as to better focus resources.
Supporters of the countermeasure gathered at the state Capitol Thursday morning to promote the “Sexual Assault Against Rideshare Passengers and Drivers Prevention and Accountability Act.” The proposal would require Uber to follow the same safety standards as taxis, buses and trains, and increase accountability in sexual assault cases.
“California voters stand ready and willing to protect victims of sexual assault,” Valerie McGinty of Fund Her, a political action committee that works to elect women to office, said during the presser conference said.
Danielle Tudahl, a survivor of sexual harassment, including on Uber rides, said the measure would push for “implementing the strongest background checks, real safety measures and real transparency when harm happens on the app.”
Tudahl recalled an experience of her own, in which she said the driver asked questions, “Like, do you have a boyfriend? Are you single? Are you staying here by yourself? How old are you? And started responding with extremely inappropriate comments all surrounding how young I looked.”
Attorney Micha Star Liberty, who works with sexual assault victims, said riders depend on the platform’s safety promises.
“They’re relying on an app, a business, a system that has promised them safety,” Liberty said. “Something feels off. The driver maybe doesn’t match the phone, the route changes.”
Alliance Against Corporate Abuse says its measure is a direct response to Uber’s proposal, arguing the company’s plan would make it harder for accident victims to sue.
Carmen Balber of Consumer Watchdog, a coalition member of the opposition campaign, alleged Uber’s priorities are driven by profit. “Because Uber’s interest is in keeping as many drivers on the road as possible at all times, no matter how unsafe they are, because it maximizes profits,” Balber said.
McGinty pointed to reporting from The New York Times cited in the campaign, saying incidents occur frequently.
“[With their ballot measure, Uber has] had a huge overreach, and what we’re trying to do is actually quite targeted,” McGinty said. “We’re actually going after a problem they know they have, which is every eight minutes, when you have a sexual assault and you’re getting that reported to you, you need to do something about it.”
A spokesperson for the opposition to the countermeasure criticized the effort, saying, “This ballot measure is a cynical ploy by billboard lawyers to defeat a separate, Uber-backed ballot measure that would ban predatory schemes targeting auto accident victims.”
Ads from both sides reflect the divide. The Uber-backed one says attorneys “made more than a billion while local taxpayers got screwed,” while the opposition claims, “Every eight minutes, Uber tries to silence victims.”
We asked Uber about the safety aspect. A spokesperson says its current safety process includes identity verification, driving record checks and reviews of criminal history. The company says applicants can be rejected for offenses including sexual assault, sex crimes involving minors, murder and kidnapping.
Voters could ultimately decide the fate of both measures if they qualify for the November 2026 ballot. Alliance Against Corporate Abuse says it submitted over 1.1 million voter signatures of support. According to California’s Secretary of State, this initiative needs 546,651 signatures to qualify for the ballot. A More Affordable California says it’s submitted more than 800,000 voter signatures of support. According to California’s Secretary of State, this initiative needs 874,641 signatures to qualify for the ballot.
The debate comes as Uber faces legal challenges over rider safety. A federal jury in North Carolina recently ordered the company to pay a woman who said she was sexually assaulted during a ride. In February, a federal jury in Arizona also ordered Uber to pay a woman who said she was raped during a ride. The company faces thousands of similar assault claims.
Watch more from ABC10: Advocates push ballot measure to increase Uber passenger safety
ABC10: Watch, Download, Read
1
/
12