Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Illinois Vehicle Window Tint Law

EDITOR'S NOTE: I spoke to Representative Bossi's office. Please see the comment section for a quick update on the status of this bill.



Illinois is potentially changing one of its most disfavored laws among motorist. It deals with window film, more commonly referred to as window tint. As it stands, drivers are not allowed to have any non-reflective or reflective tint film on the windows directly adjacent to each side of the driver, however if the new law takes force it will allow motorists to have window tint on the front drivers and front passengers windows which allows a 50% light transmittance.

The new notion rests in simple fact that drivers or passengers of motor vehicles should be able to protect themselves from skin cancer, while at the same time to protecting the environment from the harmful emissions created by the excessive and unnecessary use of vehicle air-conditioning systems.

Many states currently have similar rules regarding vehicle window tint, and it seems Illinois won’t be far behind. As of April 2nd, 2009 the Illinois House unanimously passed the bill in favor of the change. Currently the bill sits in the Illinois Senate after being given the “OK” by the Transportation committee.

Want to stay up to date? Check out the bill status at the Illinois General Assembly website:
Illinois General Assembly Vehicle Tinted Window Film Bill Status

90 comments:

Waseem A. Mateen said...

Passed by both the Senate and the House on Saturday, off to be signed by the Governor.

Emily said...

How long before the Governor signs it?

Fred said...

Any update or idea how long this will take?

Waseem A. Mateen said...

Any bill not returned by the Governor within 60 calendar days after it is presented to him shall become law. If recess or adjournment of the General Assembly prevents the return of a bill, the bill and the Governor's objections must be filed with the Secretary of State within such 60 calendar days. The Secretary of State must return the bill and objections to the originating chamber promptly upon the next meeting of the same General Assembly at which the bill can be considered.

Fred said...

Just a guess but I think it will likely be part of the bill mentioned here: http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/08/quinn-will-sign-ban-on-texting-while-driving.html

The Governor is signing a ban on texting and driving, therefore they may try to incorporate the tint law into the same bill, a common theme in lawmaking.

Anonymous said...

It is amazing that they move to make it illegal to text while driving or to use a cell phone while in a school zone, but then at the same time blind the police that are to enforce these rules by allowing tint. Not only are some (most) politicians in Illinois corrupt, they are all idiots!

Waseem A. Mateen said...

In response to the previous comment;

I believe the new tint law allows for no tints lower than the 50% range. This means that, depending on the weather conditions, most people can still see the passengers most of the time. (i.e. police officers)

Chrys said...

If I am not mistaken the governor has niether signed nor vetoed this bill. If he does not act on it by 11:59pm next Monday, August the 24th it will become law. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it does not get shot down in the final days, but since the General Assembly is in recess until September 6th I think it's a pretty safe bet that this will become law.

Keith Kretschmar, DC said...

Cary, IL police have been pulling drivers over recently for tinting. I received a warning last Saturday and my sister-in-law recently had the same experience. Why the sudden attention, especially with the looming change? I purchased my car in FL and have lived here for 2 years now without being pulled over until recently. Keith Kretschmar, DC

Steffon said...

I just called the Illinois Traffic Safety division to inquire about the window tinting law in Illinois. The person I spoke with said the 50% or less for the front passenger and driver side window has not passed and the law is still now tint allowed on the front passenger and drive side window. Any idea when the new law will go into effect and how will it be communicated to the public?

Anonymous said...

If I understood right from posts above it will become a law this folowing Tuesday if governor does not object it, right?

Waseem A. Mateen said...

Unfortunately, people have been gambling. Many residents of Illinois, in anticipation of the law, have been getting their windows tinted.

However regardless what the law will be in a few days, the law today stands and must be upheld. For all we know it may not be signed? It is up to the officers discretion whether or not they cite the motorist a ticket.

I assume there have been a surge of people taking their vehicles to add tints to their windows and the police have noticed.

Don said...

Ammendatory Veto issued:

"August 25, 2009

To the Honorable Members of the
Illinois House of Representatives
96th General Assembly

I hereby return House Bill 3325 with a specific recommendation for change. I thank the sponsors for their hard work on this legislation. While I approve of the objective of this legislation, a technical change is necessary to correct a flaw in the bill as drafted. If this bill were to become law as written, driving multipurpose passenger vehicles (sport utilities) that have their rear windows factory tinted would violate the law.
Therefore, pursuant to Article IV, Section 9(e) of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return House Bill 3325, entitled “AN ACT concerning transportation”, with the following specific recommendation for change:
on page 6, by replacing lines 7 through 13 with “(3) on multipurpose passenger vehicles, as defined by Section 1-148.3b of this Code, with a nonreflective tint originally applied by the manufacturer on the windows to the rear of the driver’s seat, the side windows immediately adjacent to each side of the driver may be treated with a nonreflective tint that allows at least 50% light transmittance, with a 5% variance observed by a law enforcement official metering the light transmittance.”.
With these changes, House Bill 3325 will have my approval. I respectfully request your concurrence.

Sincerely,
PAT QUINN
Governor"

Michael W. Huseman said...

Thanks for the update.

Anonymous said...

Why can't they just spell it out in plain english?? Check it out...625 5/12-503(a-5) says you can have tint that does not allow less than 50% light transmittance on the front windows adjacent to the driver, BUT this section does not apply to vehicles where the rear windows have tint that allows less than 30% light transmittance. Then a-7 says you can have tint that does not allow less than 35% L.T. on the front windows adjacent to the driver, BUT this section does not apply to vehicles where the rear windows have tint that allows less than 35%L.T.? What?? a-5 says 30% in the exception and a-7 says 35%. Why do we need both sections in the first place? Just say we can have no less than 35% L.T. on the front as long as we don't have tint on the rear windows that allow less than 30% L.T. Then, to make matters worse, skip to a-9, which deals with mulit-purpose vehicles, and read where you can have tint that does not allow less than 50% L.T. on the front doors adjacent to the driver. BUT, again this section does not apply to MPV's which have OTHER THAN FACTORY TINT on the windows to the rear of the driver. So, then a-5 or a-7 would apply to an SUV that has after market tint on the rear windows?? The Governor's version of a-9 appears to say the same thing with different wording! I don't know. It just seems this whole thing could be made much more simpler to understand. I have a headache now. Time for bed.

Rich said...

How long does the process take after the Gov makes his changes?
Also make it a law that people have to use a headset(cellphone) while driving, this keeps their hands free, there perriferal vision open, and is no different than talking to a passenger sitting right next to you!
If the police have a problem with the tinting while pulling someone over ( as far as their own safety) then get on the P A and tell them to put all their windows down!
I do agree that it will be harder to see if someone is on their cellphone texting (if illegal)but lets be realistic; cant our officers time be used more productively and be steered more toward preventing acts of violence against our fellow man(molestations,rape,breaking and entering, etc.etc.)

Anonymous said...

What does this mean? 10/5/2009 House Motion Filed Override Amendatory Veto Rep. Suzanne Bassi

Michael W. Huseman said...

I don't know. But I'll get some answers on this next week. I plan to call down to Springfield to get the status of this bill. I'll let everybody know what I find out.

Bijoy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bijoy said...

Sooo, I'm guessing that the law has passed and we are allowed to tint our windows??? Is this true?

Michael W. Huseman said...

I spoke to a staff member at Representative Bossi's office regarding the status of this bill. She was most helpful in explaining this process to me.

As you know, Governor Quinn vetoed the bill. His office took issue with the language regarding multi-passenger vehicles. Apparently, the manufacturer's tint on most passenger busses and SUVs violates this bill. So purchasers of new vehicles would automatically be in violation of the law. Governor Quinn proposed language which he thought would correct the problem.

Rep. Bossi did not agree with the Governor's proposed language, so she filed a Motion to Override the Governor's veto. This motion will be heard at one of the next two upcoming veto sessions, either October 14, 15, 16 or October 28, 29, 30.

To override the Governor's veto, they need at least a 3/5 vote of the House and Senate, or a supermajority. If they override the veto, the bill automatically becomes law without any further action. Rep. Bossi's office will then propose an amendment at the next session correcting the multi-passenger vehicle issue.

If they do not receive the supermajority, they either have to accept the Governor's proposed language, or re-write their own. Rep. Bossi's office indicated that if that happens, they will probably wait until the next session to introduce a revised version of this bill.

So, you will have some answers before the end of the month. Check back for updates.

Waseem A. Mateen said...

Excellent work, thanks for the update Mike!!!

Anonymous said...

Some science... I don't think that UV rays are passed through glass in sufficient quantities to cause skin cancer. Also, very few drivers are exposed to sun in their cars in a long enough duration for there to be a concern.

Anonymous said...

I read that it passed the house but when will it pass the senate?

Anonymous said...

So, that's it??? It passed already, right? I can drive now without being afraid to get ticket?

Michael W. Huseman said...

The law has not yet passed. We hope to have more information by the end of the month.

will said...

I was just pulled over Thursday also after owning a truck with tinted windows the past 4 years. I don't simply have window film, it is an etch type chemical application, custom applied. I'm waiting until the end of October to see if the law will pass. Anybody have any new info on the law?

Anonymous said...

I was pulled over last week and told I can get 30 days in jail for multiple tint violations. Is this true? I have received 2 warning and now my second ticket.

Michael W. Huseman said...

In response to the last commenter, the penalties for obstructed windows will not change even if this law changes next week.

Violations are, and will continue to be, petty offenses where the possible penalty is a fine ranging from $50-$500.

After your first conviction, however, subsequent violations are Class C misdemeanors where the maximum penalty can be up to 30 days in jail and a fine of up to$500.

The maximum fine for most Class C misdemeanors is actually $1500, but this section is capped at $500.

Also, any person convicted under this section SHALL be ordered to remove the tint.

It may be possible to avoid a conviction on this ticket. Please contact me directly if you have any further questions.

Anonymous said...

On 10/15 the motion to override the amendatory veto prevailed with 107 yeas and 8 nays.

Anonymous said...

It passed the house. I believe it still has to pass the senate.

AndrewNoNumbers said...

I know almost nothing about law, so here's are my two question:
1. Quinn proposed change seems to make perfect sense, and it doesn't affect the main goal of the bill. So why is the House trying to override it? Wouldn't that make a mess for car dealers? I honestly don't care which way it goes, as long as the new law allows 50% in front.
2. Illinois' current law seems to be 0% in front, and anything in back. So when the law gets passed it will just change it to 50% in front and not change the anything in back? Look at this page for more info. http://www.tintlaws.com/laws/IL/

Anonymous said...

HB3325 this bill goes to a vote 10-28-09 contact your senator via email for his support

Anonymous said...

Can anyone answer this? If the bill passes today and tints are legal in the state of IL, do individual municipalities have to abide by the law? I believe there are several statutes in the city of Chicago that differ from the atae law.Am I still gonna get the $250 tickets from the city? Are officers advised of the change right away? Or do I have to contest the ticket pointing out the new law?

Anonymous said...

Did it pass???

David said...

Just spoke with some on in Representative Bassi's office and the bill is being voted on today or tomorrow.

Looks like the City of Chicago is getting their licks in while they can. I had a window tint ticket on my car this morning and as I drove off I noticed dozens of cars with tickets on them. Come on Chicago.

Anonymous said...

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=3325&GAID=10&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=46080&SessionID=76&GA=96

it says that the amendatory veto was overridden in both houses. does this mean that it is now a law and effective immediately or does it start on january 1st, 2010?

Anonymous said...

effective immediately

Anonymous said...

I'm probably a bit slower than most, but without the 'fanfare' saying "Hooray! This has passed and is now a law!" I feel like I'm still unsure of the status. I see a post that says, it passed both houses and the veto was overridden and another that says effective immediately, so can we take that as the way of saying, you can now have 50% window tint on the front windows in IL?

Anonymous said...

So, there is one thing that I am still lost on... Where do trucks fit into all this? I have an F150 with factory privacy glass behind the driver, can I tint my front sides or not? Does a pickup fit the description of an MPV as defined here? It is constructed on a truck frame since it is a truck, and it is designed for off-road use as it is 4x4...

Sec. 1‑148.3b. Multipurpose passenger vehicle. A motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed to carry 10 persons or less that is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off‑road operation.

Michael W. Huseman said...

I would be very comfortable defending a ticket based upon that definition.

But keep in mind that the police can still pull you over if they think you have excessive tint. Those types of stops can lead to other charges.

Anonymous said...

So are we now allowed to have window tint in IL? Michael what is the best way to reach you on my tint ticket court date 11-12-09.

Michael W. Huseman said...

Call me Monday afternoon at 630-897-8764.

Anonymous said...

Will do. Did the tint law pass?

Michael W. Huseman said...

Yes. It is effective immediately.

Anonymous said...

I am not clear on how this will effect 'trucks' in IL. What I am refering to is the true truck plated, over 8,000lb vehicles in IL. These vehicles have to go through inspections, currently have the lower speed limit, etc.

My pickup truck is plated with 12,000lb D plates.

Michael W. Huseman said...

I just spoke to a reader of the blog who was ticketed for illegal tint on October 30, 2009 -- the same day this bill became law.

The ticket is from downstate Illinois, so I will not be handling the case, but it will be interesting to see how the court handles this situation.

To the ticketed motorist: Please comment back with a quick update after your case is resolved.

Thanks.

Matthew B. said...

My car was ticketed on November 9, 2009 while parked on the street in the city of Chicago. The violation (0976220b) was for "smoked/tinted windows park/stand" and the fine was $250. Is this a valid ticket after the change in state law? Do Chicago city ordinances still apply dispite a change in state law? Any advice would be much appreciated. Thank you.

Waseem A. Mateen said...

Matthew,

What percentage are your tints? If I am not mistaken the law allows for window tints that are 50%. The percentage corresponds to the amount of light that is allowed to enter the window.

If the tint is noticeably darker then what the law allows, I don't see why the assessment of the ticket would not be upheld.

Although I don't think it is possible to exactly identify what percentage tint a window is simply by looking at, I do believe it is very evident when tint is darker then 50%. This is because tint that is 50% still allows a person from the outside to see the interior cabin of a vehicle and even out the opposite window.

Matthew B. said...

Waseem,

I am not sure about the exact percentage of my tints but the front and back windows (it is a four-door car) on both sides are very lightly tinted. You can easily see into the the cabin and out the window on the other side. The large, back window is a little darker but you can still see through it inside the car and out the front windshield. If I contest this by mail should I reference the new law? If so, what is it? Thanks again

Elise Walker said...

I have the same question as Matthew B. I hope they educate us more about this as ignorance from the law does not absolve you of any rule-breaking.

Tony said...

From what I understood, You are allowed to have 35% all around. So with the 50% on the front windows, you should be fine.

Waseem A. Mateen said...

Tony,

I just read through it again, it states a "...person may drive a motor vehicle with a nonreflective material tinted film that does not allow less than 50% light transmittance upon the side windows immediately adjacent to each side of the driver." *(Note a 5% variance is allowed)

Shaun said...

I am still confused. If my tints are 50% or less, why do I keep getting tickets in the city of Chicago for $250. Can someone help please??

Anonymous said...

This goes back to the question I posed earlier in this thread. Can individual municipalities have their own statutes that over ride the state?

I got my windows tinted last week. I followed the letter of the law. Yesterday I received a $250 from Chicago.

I removed the film on the front windows pending the outcome of my ticket. Im going to fight it. I dont know if it was just an uninformed cop or if it is still illegal in the city?

Anonymous said...

tickets are not valid...if recieving a ticket a letter should do; a copy of the ticket with a copy of the statute to; 1)Police Superintendent 2) Mayors office, and to you police CAPS officer-should get some reponse.
Or go to your police district office, again the copies, speakw/ a watch commander, and that should filter to your beat officer who ....more than likely it's a training issue for police

Anonymous said...

There is another site I have been following as well on this and below is a code they keep referring to about Home Rule for the city of Chicago. I'm not a lawyer so please read to get a better understanding.

65 ILCS 5/1‑2.1‑2) Sec. 1‑2.1‑2. This section is included in the Illinois Municipal Code, and is pursuant to localities that utilize "Home Rule.

Anonymous said...

Police Officer here. You are correct that the state law has been changed, however municipalitites always have the ability to make laws that are more stringent than the state or federal laws, they simply can not be more lax. For example, pistols are legal in illinois, however they are illegal in Chicago due to local ordinance. Window tinting up to 35% is now legal in ilinois, however it is still illegal in Chicago due to local ordinance. As for appealing, you can give it a try but I wouldn't hold my breath. As is always the case, ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law.......

D.J. Evans said...

I would disagree with some of what the police officer said. Asserting that local municipalities "always" have the ability to make laws that are more stringent than state law is going a bit too far.

While it is true that a local ordinance can be more stringent, if the local ordinance is in conflict with the state law, it will be preempted. There is even more that goes along with preemption on the state and local level which I will save for a post when I have the time and energy to write about it.

D.J. Evans said...

Just to clarify the issue of preemption, it can happen either expressly or implicitly. I will use state and local law since that was the discussion before.

For instance, state law can expressly preempt local municipalities from regulating a particular area of the law by including an express provision in the statute which regulates that particular field.

Implied preemption can occur either through 1.conflict preemption or 2.field preemption.

Conflict preemption can occur where the local law makes it impossible to comply with the state law.

Field preemption can occur where it is obvious that the state regulates such a wide area of the field of the law in which the local municipality is trying to regulate, that there is an inference that the state legislature did not intend for local municipalities to regulate the field.

Anonymous said...

Bottom line... Does the city of Chicago still have the right to give out tickets for the tint?

Anonymous said...

Bottom line..? Can the city of Chicago still give out tint tickets? how do thet measure the tint? I got a ticket on a parked car that has no tint on the front, just residue from the tint glue. You can't even tell if the window's tinted or not in the picture on the ticket.

Michael T said...

Is there an answer on the City of Chicago's ability to give a ticket for front tinted windows? Wondering if anyone has gotten out of these tickets in the City since the law has been changed?? How did you do it?

Anonymous said...

What happened? House bill 4327 effective 1.1.10 once again basically states no tint on front 2 windows. It does not even speak to the balance of the vehicle. Where did house bill 3325 and its content go? I am not sure how the new HB4327 is different than the previous law other than stiffer penalties to those with tint or those who install?? Very confused as to where HB3325 went and where law enforcement stands. A local police officer gave me his 2010 Law Update for Law Enforcement copy. Not good. Educated comments please.......

Anonymous said...

bottom line we gotta get mayor daley the heck out office the guy is ridiculous and doesnt address nothing always seems to put the questions on sup jody weis then again jody makes $90,000 more than the mayor allegedly...

Anonymous said...

With all due respect to the individual who represented him/herself as an officer, the city can't claim home rule on this one. Please reference the language of the law and you will be able to decipher that. It appears that your belief is that any non-resident of the city who drives a tinted vehicle into the municipality would be breaking the law. That would be absurd. Furthermore, I find it ironic that when I've driven past a city police station parking lot, I've seen officer's private vehicles with tinted windows.

You referenced the gun law; you are comparing apples to oranges. There's a bit of a difference between a gun and a window tint. Nevertheless, the gun law that you spoke of is scheduled to be challenged in the supreme court on or March 2, 2010.

Look, criminals will get guns regardless of the law. It's those who obey the laws that tend to get short changed in a situation like this.

terra said...

Please, can anyone help me? I was pulled over because of my tinted windows. I was ticketed and told that I could try to contest the violation in court. I drive a Volvo wagon and bought the car with the windows already tinted. The windows have a manufacture's tint with the car's logo placed over the tint. How do I check the percentage of visible light? Is there a way to prove the light coming through? I am convinced that the minimal tint on my windows is not a violation, I just do not know what to do from here.
Terra

Anonymous said...

Did you see Illinois HB4327, it goes into effect 01/01/10 basically reverting the window tint law back to its original language. Tint only allowed six inches from the top of the windshield, and nothing at all on the windows immediately adjacent to the driver. Tint is allowed on the rear windows and the back windshield.

Emily said...

The law isn't reverted...
They are seperate bills, one deals with fines for tint shops installing illegally, the other sets tint parameters. HB 4327 only changes language regarding tint shops.

Go here for more details.
http://www.cyberdriveillinois.com/departments/vehicles/license_plate_guide/standard_plates/tinted_windows.html

Anonymous said...

I finally got around to tinting my 99 civic. went with 35% all around. Its good, but it just doesnt seem dark enough for me.
Im gonna tint my 2010 altima this week but i dont know if i should go with limo (5%), 15%, or 20%. im leaning more towards the 15% or 20% but i cant decide.. is there a noticeable difference? what should i choose?
thanks in advance.

Waseem A. Mateen said...

Consider the following factors when deciding to get privacy tints:

What color is the interior of your vehicle? (the darker the interior color the darker the tint will appear from the outside of the vehicle)

How often do drive at night? (the darker the tint, decreases night time visibility in your vehicle)
Advice: avoid darker tint for your safety and the safety of others.

As always you should avoid illegal tint percentages i.e. limo tints on the windows adjacent to the driver.
Advice: avoid illegal tints, otherwise you will eventually be cited for violations.

Vehicle tint's, as appealing as they may be, are intended to reduce excess use of air conditioning by drivers during summer days, as well as reducing excessive UV rays on the vehicle occupants.

The mere fact that vehicle privacy tints are allowed, does not give vehicle owners free reign to disregard the law and choose from among tint percentages that are against the law.

Anonymous said...

If you go to the Illinois Compiled statutes (I'll post the direct link at the bottom of this) there are two sections which cover 12-503. The first one you see, allows for no window tint on the windows immediately adjacent to the driver. The second version of 12-503 allows tint with certain percentages. The first one went into effect 01/01/10. The second 10/30/09. These are listed at the bottom of the statutes. It appears the law has reverted back to its original language.

Anonymous said...

heres the link to 12-503

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=062500050HCh%2E+12+Art%2E+V&ActID=1815&ChapAct=625%26nbsp%3BILCS%26nbsp%3B5%2F&ChapterID=49&ChapterName=VEHICLES&SectionID=59764&SeqStart=129100000&SeqEnd=129600000&ActName=Illinois+Vehicle+Code%2E

Anonymous said...

I would really appreciate a clarification:

What does "NOT LIMITED TO" mean in the following:

(625 ILCS 5/12‑503) (From Ch. 95 1/2, par. 12‑503)

(Text of Section from P.A. 96‑530)

From Paragraph (G-2)...

"The owner must obtain a certified statement or letter written by a physician licensed to practice medicine in Illinois that such person owning and operating or being transported in a motor vehicle is afflicted with or suffers from such illness, ailment, or disease, including but NOT LIMITED TO systemic or discoid lupus erythematosus, disseminated superficial actinic porokeratosis, or albinism, and such certification must be carried in the motor vehicle at all times."

Patty from IL Sec. St. Office (217) 785-5215 has already denied our plates because our affliction is not listed above... Both my wife and I have a propensity for Melanoma (skin cancer) and have doctors letter on file.

She claims the above statement is not current, and the "including but NOT" portion has been omitted last Dec. 2009. All the websites show what is captured above... in 4 months there have been no website updates?

If Patty is correct... Why maximize protection for only certain conditions (that can be treated and are survivable) and not maximize protection against deadly skin cancer? What medical reasoning supports this decision? Neither my dermatologist nor my wife’s would have endorsed this decision.

I feel discriminated against by this decision and will possibly be placed at further risk. Not to mention the cost to change the current tint on both my vehicles to a less effective UV filter. $200.00 each so I can be legal... once again. We have been abiding by the law and enrolled in this tint program (with doctor’s letter in the car, and on file the Springfield and the new ..WT plates issued) since my first diagnosis in the late 90s. Now we don't qualify?? Absurd!!!

Thank you any response.

Anonymous said...

In November of last year I was issued a ticket for tints in Chicago. I contested the ticket by mail and it was dismissed (I did not have to show up for a hearing). Below is a copy of the letter I sent to get the ticket dismissed, feel free to use it:

City of Chicago Department of Revenue
P.O. Box 88298
Chicago, IL 60680-1298

Dear Sir or Madam:
On November 9, 2009 I was issued a violation notice for my vehicle (license plate # xxxxxxx) which was legally park on a Chicago city street. The violation (issue no. xxxxxxx) was for having smoked/tinted windows while parked (code: 0976220B). I believe that this violation was issued erroneously. Illinois Public Act 096-0815 (Found at: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?Name=096-0815), an act regarding changes to sections 3-412 and 12-503 of the Illinois Vehicle Code, states that:
(a-5) No window treatment or tinting shall be applied to the windows immediately adjacent to each side of the driver, except:
(1) on vehicles where none of the windows to the rear
of the driver's seat are treated in a manner that allows
less than 30% light transmittance, a nonreflective tinted
film that allows at least 50% light transmittance, with a
5% variance observed by any law enforcement official
metering the light transmittance, may be used on the side
windows immediately adjacent to each side of the driver.
(2) on vehicles where none of the windows to the rear
of the driver's seat are treated in a manner that allows
less than 35% light transmittance, a nonreflective tinted
film that allows at least 35% light transmittance, with a
5% variance observed by any law enforcement official
metering the light transmittance, may be used on the side
windows immediately adjacent to each side of the driver.


This Act was signed into law on October 30, 2009 and became effective immediately (Section 99), a full ten days before my violation was issued. As my vehicle falls well within the standards set forth in said Act (all windows on the vehicle are treated to allow at least 50% light transmittance, except for the lone rear window, which allows no less than 35% light transmittance) and no light transmittance meter reading was provided to dispute this, I believe that this violation was issued in error and I kindly request that it be nullified. Please feel free to contact me, using the information provided at the top of this letter, with any questions or concerns regarding this issue. Thank you.

Azizajalal said...

If recess or adjournment of the General Assembly prevents the return of a bill, the bill and the Governor's objections must be filed with the Secretary of State within such 60 calendar days.


Tint

Martin Do it said...

I am also in favor of tinting the windows because of the same two reasons that it will keep the car cool and will protect the skin but some times criminals can use it for unfair means.

Anonymous said...

according to PA 096-0815 states

on vehicles where none of the windows to the rear of the driver's seat are treated in a manner that allow less than 35% light transmittance, a nonreflective tinted film that allows at leadt 35% light transmittance, with a 5% variance observed by any law enforcement official metering the light transmittance, ,may br used on the side windows immediately adjacent to each side of the driver.

on one site it says that you can do all your windows excluding the windshield at 35% but if I am reading this right you can have the back part of your car at 35% and the drivers and passenger windows at 40% It's hard to tell how they word things.

To all of those getting tickets that are in these legal limits wheather its in Chicago of not they can fight them and win. According to the Sec of state each city ect can make their laws stricter than the state law if it is in reguards to a moving ordinance such as speed limits and citations that would be considered moving violations they can't however do this with nonmovers. So the tickets if faught will not go through as a conviction bring a copy of this law with you to court IL P,A. 096-0815 also if y ou have tinted windows keep a copy of this act with you in your car as many police officers are not aware of the new law and what it entails

Anonymous said...

I think the laws relating to tint should be reviewed.

tint film.

Tyler Gross said...

Yea so what is the darkest tint or combo u can have in illinois?????
Email me @ Tags_93@hotmail.com...
thanks

Interwest Safety said...

I'm really glad that they changed this law. I hope that they make it legal in all of the states in case I have to move. There isn't anything worse than having to remove expensive tint from your nice windows...

Anonymous said...

I was just pulled over in Iowa by the Iowa State Police.. Directly across the Illinois border for window tint. I have 35% tint all the way around. The officer used a meter to measure my window darkness. I saw 29% before he quickly removed it. I was issued a $127.50 ticket. There was no attitude involved...nothing. Not only did I get a ticket but the "meter" scratched my window tint..actually TORE it. I visited a professional local window tinter and was told the tint was definitely 35% and no darker.


So fair warning to anyone that gets pulled over for window tint. Doesnt matter what you have.. 50%..35%.. If they use a meter it WILL ruin your tint.. and they are not liable. They do what they want..when they want.. how they want. Dont believe me? Read this..
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/texting-sexting-emailing-state-trooper,news-8085.html

arizona glass said...

Here in Arizona we are very limited on how much we can tint our front 2 windows driver and passenger side, but there are no limitations on the back two or the rear window. I decided to get my front ones tinted anyways but I got pulled over finally after 3 years ha. I wish they weren't so strict about it, here in AZ we need every bit of protection from the sun as we can as it is so hot down here!

mesa glass said...

Any luck in getting the bill passed?

Houston said...

A very informative article which I particularly enjoyed reading

Colorado Window Tinting said...

Thanks for the again sharing .I believe the new tint law allows for no tints lower than the 50% range.

RebeccaB said...

Can you please advise what is the current, as of May 2012, Illinois law regarding window tinting for both front (driver & passenger) as well as rear windows. Is it possible for a municipality to have a stricter law regarding the tint percentages/applications? If so, how would such law be applicable to those who are not residing in that municipality?
Thank you in advance.

Jessie Pearl said...

Auto window tints are also offered and sold in various grades and shades. There is even a law that regulates the darkness of window tints. So before selecting any auto tint it is advisable that you consult a professional to avoid any future problems with the law.It is also advisable not to buy do-it-yourself tints.

car glass replacement

Technical Tinting & Clear Bra said...

Be sure to consult your tinting services or company about the law regarding tinting in your area.

Earl Finnegan said...

That seems like a very silly law to have. I can't imagine them banning auto window tinting in Fort Myers FL where I live.