Blood alcohol levels are pretty standard when it comes to arrests for driving under the influence arrests. Any driver with a .08 blood alcohol level is considered impaired. The standard for marijuana is not as cut and dry. State law says if someone has a certain amount of marijuana in their blood, they are also considered impaired.
"The way it works now is if you're over a certain level for cannabis, you're guilty, no matter what," Assem. Steve Yeager, D-Las Vegas said. "It doesn't matter if you consumed two weeks ago. It doesn't matter if you are a heavy medical user. You basically have no ability to defend yourself the way that the law operates now."
The law says if a driver has two nanograms of THC per milliliter or five nanograms of marijuana metabolite per milliliter in their blood, then they are impaired. Assembly Bill 400 would remove that provision. Studies show that the blood tests do not prove the level of impairment. It shows the presence of marijuana but it doesn't show when it was used or what the person's tolerance is.
"These numbers that we have in our laws just are not supported at all by science," Yeager said.
Yeager says people could be high even if they are below the legal limit or they could be sober despite being above the threshold.
"My main concern is that we don't have people who are being prosecuted and convicted when they're not impaired and that we're capturing all the people that actually are impaired," Yeager said.
Many in Monday's Assembly Judiciary Committee meeting agree that the standard is not an exact science but they are not ready to scrap the existing law.
"I'm very afraid that we would not be eligible for some highway traffic safety funds from the federal government since it's a federally Schedule 1 Drug," Assem. Jim Wheeler, R-Minden said.
Nevada is one of six states with a per se law, where a specific level of THC constitutes a DUI. Others have no tolerance for any trace of marijuana in the blood. Many do not have any of these laws but they have not lost federal funding. Wheeler says he does not want Nevada to be the first though. Other concerns include potential impacts to commercial driver's licenses and workers compensation.
"Our worker's comp laws are tied to our DUI laws," Yeager said. "Not every state does it that way. So there may be an ability to separate those two out."
Wheeler says he would like to talk to law enforcement officials to see what their stance is on the legislation.
"If you can have a standard for other drugs, other things, then there has to be some kind of standard but this is all new territory we're in," Wheeler said.
Yeager says many other states rely on field sobriety tests for marijuana impairment, and they still get DUI convictions. Wheeler does not think that is a high enough standard.
"How many people want to go to court on something subjective?" Wheeler said. "So we need to be able to have some kind of blood test, urine test, etc., medical test that tells you whether they were impaired or not. I just don't know how we get there."
DUI convictions come with fines, required classes, suspension of driver's licenses, and additional insurance costs. Yeager says people who are wrongly convicted should not have to face these penalties because of an inaccurate blood test. Blood tests could still be allowed in court as evidence but they would not be held to a standard for a DUI conviction.
