Four decades later, the promised benefits are difficult to find.
In California, arrests of underage drivers for driving under the influence are exceedingly rare. In 2024, just 45 juveniles were arrested for driving under the influence—a figure that has remained consistently low for years. Rather than eliminating youth drinking, the 21-and-over mandate has driven it underground, away from licensed, regulated establishments and into unsupervised and often dangerous settings.
According to Stanford Children’s Hospital, underground binge drinking contributes annually to 1,519 deaths among college-age students from alcohol-related unintentional injuries, including motor-vehicle crashes. Each year, roughly 696,000 college students are assaulted by another student who has been drinking. An estimated one in five college students experiences sexual assault or date rape, with alcohol or other substances frequently involved.
These harms are exacerbated by where drinking occurs. Unlicensed dormitories, student apartments, and fraternities lack supervision, safety protocols, and accountability. Licensed establishments, by contrast, are required to follow responsible hospitality standards, intervene when patrons are impaired, and promote designated drivers and safe-ride programs. Moving youth drinking back into regulated social environments could also reduce social isolation.
A 2022 Carnegie Mellon University study found that while most young people drink socially, a significant minority drink alone. Solitary drinking is a strong predictor of future alcohol use disorder and is linked to rising suicide rates, particularly in the post-pandemic period.
If federal control over alcohol access were effective, outcomes would be more consistent across the states. For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration effectively ensures uniform automobile and tire manufacture safety standards. Yet, federal control over the drinking age cannot produce similar results. The result is widely varying traffic fatality statistics. Mississippi records 24.7 traffic deaths per 100,000 residents, while New York’s rate is just 5.7. Clearly, factors beyond alcohol—such as infrastructure, enforcement, vehicle safety, and emergency response—play a major role. Returning control to the states allows for more creative solutions.
In California, 2023 data show 4,061 traffic fatalities, 1,355 involving drivers with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent or higher. In 2024, 98,758 drivers were arrested for driving under the influence—the lowest total in four years—and the vast majority were adults.
Juvenile alcohol policy relies on possession and purchase laws, zero-tolerance enforcement and “use alcohol and lose your license” penalties. These tools would be better applied to adult offenders, many of whom are repeat and high-risk drivers.
A more effective approach would directly restrict access for dangerous individuals, regardless of age. Departments of Motor Vehicles in each state could issue alcohol purchase endorsements on driver’s licenses and identification cards. Any alcohol-related conviction would result in the loss of the ability to purchase alcohol.
Such a system would target behavior rather than age. It would hold offenders accountable while allowing adults aged 18 to 21—who can vote, serve on juries, and enlist in the military—to enjoy the one remaining adult privilege denied to them: having a drink with friends in a safe, regulated setting.
Steve Smith is a senior fellow in urban studies at the Pacific Research Institute, focusing on California’s growing crime challenge.
