This assumes that they care about applying logic and consistency. There is little evidence that this is the case.

FACTS but forcing it into the courts is a good start

On the carpool lane case—the woman and her child are two different people, but combined they occupy only one of the car's seats, and the latter is more relevant to the purpose of HOV lanes.

> Malicious Compliance. It opens a whole can of worms they weren't prepared for.

Until reality hits and you get arrested/cited.

Personhood shouldn't be the only requirement to count towards HOV lane usage. For example, there's no disagreement in https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/04/end-of-the-roa... that there's enough people in the car, but that behavior is absolutely abusing the HOV lane.

I see no problem with pregnant women using the carpool lane. I certainly don't want them stuck on the freeway if they have to pee.

Really, I see it the same as any parent transporting their own kids. The real point of the carpool lane is to reduce the number of cars on the road by having multiple adults who are able to drive share a vehicle. Nonetheless we already make exceptions for other passengers who can't drive.