Mandatory driver impairment sensors clear a funding hurdle, but are they ready?
Source: AP
By JEFF McMURRAY
Updated 1:25 AM CST, February 14, 2026
A federal law requiring impairment-detection devices inside all new cars survived a recent push to strip its funding but remains stalled by questions about whether the technology is ready.
Rana Abbas Taylor lost her sister, brother-in-law, nephew and two nieces when a driver with a blood-alcohol level almost four times the legal limit slammed into their car in January 2019 as the Michigan family drove through Lexington, Kentucky, on the way home from a Florida vacation.
The tragedy turned Abbas Taylor into an outspoken advocate for stopping the more than 10,000 alcohol-related deaths each year on U.S. roads. Lawmakers attached the Honoring Abbas Family Legacy to Terminate Drunk Driving Act to the $1 trillion infrastructure law that then-President Joe Biden signed in 2021.
The measure, often referred to as the Halt Drunk Driving Act, anticipated that as early as this year, auto companies would be required to roll out technology to passively detect when drivers are drunk or impaired and prevent their cars from operating. Regulators can choose from a range of options, including air monitors that sample the cars interior for traces of alcohol, fingertip readers that measure a drivers blood-alcohol level, or scanners that detect signs of impairment in eye or head movements.

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/federal-law-impairment-detection-car-dui-062d40e885a0e32c6cad0ba70163aef8
pandr32
(14,034 posts)All the kinks need to be worked out first.
hlthe2b
(113,296 posts)who may be AMONG those most at risk for DUI, but comparatively poor, buy this new technology that everyone will pay for?
That said, I certainly appreciate the need.
LiberalArkie
(19,534 posts)My neighbor starts his truck, locks the doors and goes to the bar and jumps in his truck and heads out drunk
Jerry2144
(3,228 posts)How would that even work if you are the designated driver and your passengers are like Kegsbreath or Pirro? The false positives could be more deadly than the small risk they're managing. And a false negative would open the door for liability of the car manufacturer, "Why did the car you manufactured fail to stop Kegsbreath from driving drunk?" would be a cause of many lawsuits, as well. Most people do not drive drunk or impaired. This sounds like a solution in search of a problem that is relatively low probability.
Maninacan
(251 posts)That thing woulda shut my car off before i got to the end of my driveway this morning.
angrychair
(11,946 posts)Let me que you in on a lesser known fact that happened to a relative of mine.
Here is the scenario:
You are over 21. No criminal record. Not even a speeding ticket. You have had some drinks and broke and but are not so drunk to make a big mistake decide it's not safe to drive home. You decide to curl up and sleep it off. Three hours later you are woken up with a tap on the window. It's the police.They pull you out of the car and arrest you for driving while impaired.
Mind you, you were asleep, your engine is cold, your keys are in your pocket. You were not driving. Police acknowledged all that was true. The problem isn't that you were driving while impaired.
It's that you were asleep in the driver's seat. If you had been in the passenger seat or back seat it would have been fine.
Many states have that rule. So even though you were doing the right thing you are still charged like you did.
Now mind you they were lenient in the sentence. Suspension of license for 30 days. Interlock on vehicle for 2 years (at a cost of over $200/month and if you can't pay it you go to jail for up to a year or more). And your car insurance goes through the roof. Plus you are banned from most international travel, potentially for the rest of your life (by the country, like Canada for example, they will let you appeal after 5 years but otherwise it's a lifetime ban)
My point is will states and lobbyists for companies that make things like interlock systems, pass laws that if you fail these checks police come arrest you simply based on the car readings and how the hell do you defend yourself against your own car?!?
This is a perfect example of unintended consequences.
NutmegYankee
(16,473 posts)Gloves in winter, hand sanitizers, allergies giving bloodshot eyes, etc. the first instance a car shuts down mid drive or wont start on a winter day will kill any public demand for equipped cars and those equipped will be quickly disabled by owners.
This was a stupid idea, and I cant wait till it is repealed.
LudwigPastorius
(14,410 posts)Heck, I don't even want my insurance company monitoring my driving, even though they claim they'll give me a break on rates.
