HARTFORD, CT – Republican House members’ efforts to give police more power to stop cars when someone inside might be using cannabis failed in close votes Monday despite some Democratic support.
Two amendments sought to allow law enforcement to stop cars when an officer or trooper sees someone smoking or ingesting cannabis and to allow for stops when an officer or trooper “reasonably expects” a child under 18 to be in a car where cannabis is being used. They were added to a wide-ranging bill – House Bill 5500 – that came out of the Judiciary Committee.
A handful of Democrats supported both Republican-offered amendments. The vote on allowing officers to stop cars where they see someone using cannabis failed 76-72 with three members absent not voting. Twenty Democrats voted in favor of that amendment.
The amendment to allow police to cite drivers using cannabis with juveniles in the vehicle failed 78-68 with five absent or not voting. Sixteen Democrats supported the amendment.
A third amendment was a Republican effort to restore officers’ ability to ask a person for consent to search their car. It also failed on an 80-66 vote with five members absent or not voting. Fourteen Democrats supported that amendment.
The debate over how far law enforcement can go in taking action involving the use of cannabis continues a clash along party lines over aspects of the 2021 legalization of recreational marijuana.
Republicans portrayed the proposals as common-sense safeguards against impaired driving and for the protection of childrens’ health. Rep. Steve Stafstrom, D-Bridgeport, House chair of the Judicial Committee, fended off a barrage of Republican comments that sought to portray Democrats as out of touch with dangers on state roadways that have been exacerbated by pot legalization.
“We are concerned about what is going on on our roadways,” said Rep. Craig Fishbein, R-Wallingford. “Under our current law, if an officer sees someone ingesting cannabis, they can’t pull the car over. I think the public would be appalled to know that.”
Stafstrom countered that police can pull over cars when there is a reasonable suspicion that the driver is impaired and that it is often difficult for police to know for sure whether someone is ingesting cannabis while they’re driving.
Current law says that cannabis use can’t be the sole reason for an officer to stop a car. It is legal to possess and transport cannabis in a car glovebox or trunk but illegal to drive under the influence of cannabis.
Stafstrom said he was troubled by language in the amendment involving children, specifically the notion that an officer could “expect” that a child was in a car where cannabis was being used. He said the amendment did not have a hearing before the Judiciary Committee where issues such as the language could have been discussed.
Rep. Greg Howard, R-Stonington, said making officers wait until a driver is clearly a danger is “counter productive” to the legislature’s effort to attack impaired driving, which includes the prohibition of drinking alcohol while driving.
He decried the idea that an officer could be stopped next to another vehicle at a light and see the driver using cannabis but has no power to take action because there was no additional violation.
On the juvenile bill, Howard noted that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have indicated that second-hand pot smoke is harmful to children.
