I think this bill is a good idea and a good safety measure. That said to me when a law requires kill switch if it detects drunk driving - that would seem to me as qualifing as "true" any statement that says "the law requires a kill switch." This also applies for good laws requiring a kill switch.

I think your statement "up in arms" suggests the conclusion, these fact checkers are rating it as false because they are not in arms about the law. But being up in arms is not relevant to whether a statement is true or false.

I think if the fact checkers were being genuine, they would rate it as true and give an explanation about the benefits of the law