[Howlin]

(2) This section does not apply to any child being nursed.

I, too, assume that that means the PASSENGER, not the driver.

[honeygrl]

"I, too, assume that that means the PASSENGER, not the driver. "

But since it doesn't specify passenger then can they charge her for violating that?

[Chemist_Geek]

Well, 257.710d(1) requires that the driver of a vehicle secure any children younger than 4 in a car seat, unless the child is nursing per 257.710d(2). So, the woman in question cannot be charged with violating 257.710d, because the child was nursing.

However, the child may be charged (probably in juvenile court) with violating 257.677(2), interfering with a driver's control over the driving mechanism. *wink* In the interest of justice, I suggest that case be dropped.

The mother may be charged with violating 257.677(1), loading the front seat so as to interfere with her operation of the driving controls; and 257.626c, carelessly operating a vehicle.

Of course, those are all Michigan laws. I don't subscribe to their theory that interstate highways operate on the laws of the driver's home state. Ohio law, with which I am not familiar, will govern this prosecution.

FWIW, I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV. My posts are not legal advice.