Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Law Assault By Drug topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montana Senate backs assault-by-drug measure after heated debate over added language on vaccines and common medicines
Summary
The Montana Senate concurred in House Bill 174 on second reading after members debated an amendment that extended the new assault offense to include a wide list of drugs — language opponents said unintentionally criminalized routine administration of medicines and vaccines without clarifying minors or medical exceptions.
The Montana Senate on March 28 voted to concur in House Bill 174, a measure creating an assault offense for knowingly or purposely providing certain drugs to another person without consent, after more than an hour of debate over an amendment that expanded the list of covered substances.
The bill's carrier, Senator Emmerich, told the committee the measure "simply extends the statute" and that it was intended to protect people who are rendered incapacitated by drugs. Emmerich said the updated language covered situations when a person receives a drug without "express, informed, or implied consent," or without consent from a parent, guardian or medical power of attorney.
Opponents argued the amendment’s language had unintended consequences. One member of the floor asked whether the amendment would mean adults needed parental permission for routine drugs like Ambien, saying the amendment “effectively now have made it so I need to ask my parent if I can take an Ambien.” Supporters, including Emmerich, said the amendment was intended to cover scenarios in which an adult cannot provide consent (for example, incapacitated adults or those with a guardian or power of attorney) and to protect minors and vulnerable adults.
Other senators raised policy and public-health concerns. Senator Newman noted the bill had been brought back to the floor with the amendment after being tabled in committee and said the change "muddied and lessened" the bill’s effectiveness. Senator Fuller urged colleagues to reject what he called a "red herring" and argued an adult who gives medication without another adult’s consent should be accountable.
Senator Emmerich repeatedly defended the amendment as protecting individuals from having medication administered without consent, and he said the bill's sponsor in the House supported the change. Supporters pointed to examples of people being "slipped a drug" and urged the Senate to pass the bill to make those acts punishable.
On the vote the clerk recorded 28 senators voting aye and 22 voting nay; the Senate concurred in House Bill 174 on second reading.
Why it matters: The amendment to HB 174 prompted a wide-ranging debate that touched on consent, public health and ordinary medical practice. Supporters said the change closes a gap that allows people to be drugged without consent; opponents warned the language as amended could sweep in lawful medical care and common prescription drugs if not clarified. The bill will go back to the House for the sponsor to accept or negotiate the Senate amendment.
Next steps: If the House accepts the Senate amendments the bill proceeds toward final enactment; otherwise the chambers may seek resolution in conference.
