Madison Fitzgerald, stateline.org
Colorado State Assemblyman Jenny Wilford says she was sexually assaulted by her Lyft driver on her way back from a coworking space in Denver last year.
In her lawsuit filed against Lyft in January, Wilford claims she was “exposed to and touched by unwelcome, disagreeable sexual contact,” and made comments while on board.
According to the lawsuit, Wilford was greeted by a different driver than the person identified on the Lyft app.
Her experiences, and the experiences shared with her by other survivors after hearing her, prompted Democrat Wilford to introduce a law this year aimed at using both rider and driver ride-sharing apps to request safety measures.
“In my opinion, all of these things are very basic in terms of safety,” Wilford said. “They were so common sense and were really discouraged and irritated for me, so I threatened to leave the state if the bill became law.”
Her bill would have required ride-sharing companies to conduct more regular background checks on drivers, creating programs for passengers or drivers who wish to record rides or videos, or develop other safety policies.
But following the threat of Uber’s death to leave the state if the measure passes, Colorado Democrat Jared Police rejected it in late May. The bill could “have unacceptable risks on Colorado’s ride-sharing services, and could lead Coloradan to businesses that rely on market escapes, price increases and reduced driver numbers,” his veto said.
Colorado is not alone. Leaders of states and cities across the country are looking for ways to make ride-sharing safer. However, in many cases, lobbying campaigns from Uber and Lyft have blocked laws aimed at increasing protection for both drivers and passengers.
Two companies that dominate the US ride-sharing industry, Uber and Lyft claim that there are plenty of safety features within the app.
“Uber has robust background checks and safety features such as audio and video recording, emergency buttons, PIN verification, and Ridecheck, using technology, transparency and accountability to protect riders, drivers and the broader community.”
“We remain committed to this work and will be talking with our bill sponsors about wise policies that keep people safe while protecting privacy and access.”
But there is still a gap in the regulation of ride-sharing companies due to their evolving technology, said Lorena Roque, interim director of education, labor and workers at the Center for Law and Social Policy, a left-leaning poverty advocacy organization.
“When you work on an app-based platform, like delivery workers and ride-share workers, there’s no clear standard because such work is relatively new,” Roque said.
Uber and Lyft employ lobbyists at the state and local levels. Another state where lawmakers are pushing for safe bills for ride-shares that businesses opposed, is another state where Uber has a pace to spend $50,000 on lobbyists this year, according to the state’s lobbying database. Lyft spends $5,000 a month on lobbyists in Rhode Island.
All over the country, Uber and Lyft testify against measures at state legislative hearings and city council meetings. In the case of Colorado, many officials representing Uber opposed Wilford’s law at a committee hearing, and Lyft wrote to Police, urging him to refuse it. Lyft’s chief policy officer Jerry Golden wrote that the requirements of the law “do not improve rider and driver conditions” and that the requirements of the law “will ignore and ultimately not improve.”
Uber told the state senator that it is “impossible” for a ridesharing company to comply with the bill’s requirements immediately after approval, and that audio and video requirements are “unable to enforce.”
“My intention in the law was never to kick out Uber or Lyft,” Wilford said. “The intention was to always require a higher level of accountability and safety from them. But if they throw tantrums, pick up a toy and go home, we can’t do that.”
Passenger safety
As part of Lyft’s safety measures, drivers must complete annual background checks and mandatory driver safety education. The app is also programmed to check in with riders when the driver stops for a long time or deviates from the assigned route.
Uber will have to regularly check their identity by conducting regular detective screenings for all active drivers and using the app to share selfies with Uber. Both companies provide live emergency assistance to riders.
Between 2020 and 2022, LYFT reported 23 fatal physical assaults in people using the LYFT platform and 2,651 instances of the five most serious categories of sexual assault, according to the 2024 Safety Transparency Report. Since the last report covering 2017-19, sexual assault cases have fallen by 21%, while fatal physical assaults have risen by 185%.
According to the company’s latest safety report, Uber saw 36 physical assault deaths and 2,717 sexual assault deaths and 2,717 cases in 2021 and 2022. Despite a 22% decline in sexual assault and misconduct, fatal physical assaults have increased since the 2019-20 report.
State lawmakers from several states have sought to address ride-sharing safety concerns with varying degrees of success.
The disputed laws between New Jersey and Massachusetts aim to prevent sexual assault and misconduct against passengers.
The New Jersey measure requires ride-sharing companies to share information with drivers about investigating sexual misconduct, allowing businesses to ban drivers during the investigation. That remains on the committee.
The Massachusetts bill, introduced by Democrat Sen. Rebecca Rausch, would create specific criminal penalties for sexually assaulting passengers by ride-share drivers. The bill also considers ride-shared passengers who cannot agree to sexual contact while on board. A hearing on the bill took place this month.
“We need to be able to make sure people are safe and that people can safely trust such a type of space,” Rausch said.
In May, Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a law that would create criminal penalties by impersonating a ride-sharing driver. From July 1st, crimes will count as a second misdemeanor. Uber supported the law.
However, in Rhode Island, Lyft is opposed to laws requiring fingerprints as part of a criminal history check. Lyft Public Policy Manager Brendan Joyce testified against the action in April, saying that fingerprinting requirements rely on the FBI’s criminal justice information system. He also argued that fingerprint checks “disproportionately and potentially discriminatory effects on communities of color.” Uber also testified against the proposal.
Rhode Island lawmakers have introduced another measure that would prevent people under the age of 16 from using ride-sharing services solely. Both bills are being held for further research.
Driver protection
57-year-old JC Muhammad has been a ride-sharing driver in and around Chicago since around 2016.
He currently works full-time as an organizer of faith-based organizations and groups supporting ride-sharing drivers, including People’s Union, a member-led organization intended to support workers in the city.
Muhammad was attacked by passengers while on a Lyft ride in 2022, he said. The passenger asked to borrow Muhammad’s phone and opened the cash app. The passengers also smacked him twice on his head, throwing a brick at the car, causing him to dent his side.
“I was angry like hell,” Muhammad said. “I really wanted to get my child engaged, and then I said, ‘No, let’s go back to my car.’ ”
After sharing the incident with Lyft, the company responded by saying that he would not match the passenger again. However, the person who rode with Muhammad did not match the profile of those who originally requested the ride, he said.
Muhammad also said he could not go to the police because he didn’t know the identity of the person in his car – and Lyft did not share the identity of the account holder who ordered Lyft.
Uber and Lyft customers have the option to check their accounts, but Muhammad said that not everyone.
“It gives us some comfort, but it’s really not enough, especially when it comes to calling the vehicle for others,” Muhammad said. “The account owner may not be an actual passenger.”
According to a 2023 report from the Center for Strategic Organizations, ride-sharing drivers across the country, especially ride-sharing drivers of colour, are frequently harassed. The Center is a coalition of labor unions representing more than 2.5 million workers across the country.
A survey of over 900 app-based ride-sharing drivers found that the majority were verbally abused, with over a quarter of respondents being threatened by physical harm. Nearly 15% of drivers were struggling, groped, hit or hit, according to the report.
In Chicago, there have been several incidents in which drivers were seduced in places stolen by fake accounts.
“These drivers have come in and you don’t know who’s going to get into the car,” Rutherford said. “And Uber doesn’t know who they are either.”
To address some of the safety and labor issues facing drivers, the Chicago City Council has begun to consider ordinances supported by the lobby of people who need passenger verification.
If passed, the ordinance must set a minimum wage for drivers, require businesses to be more transparent about fares, and disclose details such as deactivating driver accounts. Both Uber and Lyft initially opposed the ordinance. Uber warned sponsors of the measure that changes in wage rates would increase customer costs and force 10,000 drivers to cut, according to a letter sent to city councillors obtained by StateLine.
However, Uber this month agreed to a deal to scrap Chicago’s ordinance in exchange for the company’s support for state laws that allow ride-share drivers to assemble unions, the Chicago Sun-Times reported.
©2025 States Newsroom. Go to stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Original issue: June 22, 2025 9:20am EDT
