This study examined the fragmented legal framework governing compulsory insurance for autonomous vehicles in the United States and assessed its implications for liability allocation and compensation for victims. Guided by three core research questions—(1) what is the doctrinal and statutory basis for mandating compulsory insurance on autonomous vehicle manufacturers, (2) how does state-level regulatory variation affect liability allocation and compensation mechanisms for cross-jurisdictional incidents, and (3) which federal legislative approaches are legally viable to harmonize insurance and liability rules—the analysis demonstrated that the absence of a harmonized federal approach created significant legal uncertainty and inefficiencies. The research analyzed judicial precedents, statutory developments, and prior legislative initiatives at both the federal and state levels. Building on these findings, the paper proposes a federal legislative model that aims to unify liability rules, establish minimum compulsory coverage, mandate the disclosure of accident data, and create a federally administered compensation fund. These proposals aimed to enhance legal clarity, ensure adequate protection for victims, and facilitate the safe integration of autonomous vehicles into the national transportation system.
Shaima Al-Hussien (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: