Senator Wright presented CS for CS/SB 138 and the committee adopted Amendment 369,714, which replaces the phrase “any intoxicating substance” with “any impairing substance” across specified statutes and authorizes judicial-circuit DUI diversion programs.

Senator Wright said the amendment changes “any intoxicating substance to any impairing substance…to better align with the rest of the criminal and implied consent statutes” and that the change also permits state attorneys, in consultation with courts and public defenders, to create DUI diversion programs.

Members and witnesses debated the change and raised concerns about the breadth of “any impairing substance.” Senator Polsky and others opposed the bill in committee, citing concerns the catch-all could criminalize drivers who experience impairment from lawful medications. Aaron White, speaking on the record for defense interests, recommended narrowing the text to cover only substances “the person knew or reasonably should have known was intoxicating” and flagged testing limitations: FDLE forensic testing does not routinely test for all medications officers might allege. He also raised concerns about a provision that would make a refusal remain on a record and could block sealing/expungement.

Melissa Villar, representing cannabis-industry interests, warned that legal medical marijuana or hemp consumers may have baseline THC blood levels (she cited a mean level of 5 nanograms per milliliter) and argued per se standards risk unfair arrests. Committee members asked how marijuana impairment is tested; witnesses noted blood testing can show active metabolites but Florida has no statutory nanogram threshold; field sobriety observations and officer testimony remain central in drug-impaired driving prosecutions.

Law-enforcement witnesses waived in support. The committee adopted the amendment by voice vote and then recorded a roll-call that reported CS for CS/SB 138 favorably. The roll-call included recorded “no” votes from Senator Polsky and Senator Rouson; other members voted yes. Sponsor and proponents said they were open to continued discussion on tightening language.