Requires blood sample to be obtained from driver involved in motor vehicle accident resulting in death; designated as "Michelle Sous' Law."
The bill is expected to significantly impact existing traffic laws in New Jersey by expanding the scope of the implied consent law to include not only breath tests but also blood tests in situations where there is a fatality involved. By requiring blood samples from drivers, the law aims to deter driving under the influence of drugs and ultimately hopes to reduce fatal motor vehicle accidents, enhancing overall road safety. Lawmakers supporting this bill believe that it will not only clarify legal proceedings following fatal accidents but will also provide crucial evidence that could help in assessing the driver's culpability in such cases.
Assembly Bill A3298, known as 'Michelle Sous' Law', proposes to amend New Jersey's laws concerning motor vehicle accidents that result in death. The bill mandates that a blood sample be obtained from any driver involved in such a fatal accident in order to check for the presence of drugs in their system. This extension of the implied consent law is aimed at enhancing public safety by providing law enforcement officials with more information regarding the possible influence of drugs on the driver's ability to operate a vehicle safely during the incident. The blood testing will only be conducted if a warrant is issued, ensuring a legal procedure is followed to obtain the sample.
However, the bill has drawn some contention regarding individual rights and the potential increase in law enforcement powers. Critics argue that mandatory blood tests could violate the privacy rights of individuals, and there are concerns about how this might be implemented uniformly across various jurisdictions. Supporters counter that the assurance of road safety justifies the blood testing requirement, advocating that it holds drivers accountable for their actions, particularly in dire circumstances where loss of life is involved. These debates underscore the ongoing balance between individual rights and public safety in legislative discussions.