ATLANTA — Georgia’s House of Representatives has given the green light to a major legislative effort led by Republican Governor Brian Kemp aimed at restricting lawsuits within the state. The passage of this measure indicates a significant transformation could be on the horizon for Georgia’s litigation environment following extensive lobbying efforts.
Advocates of the bill argue that it will curb “frivolous” lawsuits that negatively impact business owners and constrain the large financial rewards awarded by juries. However, critics assert that it could hinder legitimate claims from Georgians, including those involving violence and sexual abuse victims. With the House passing the measure by a narrow vote of 91-82, it now advances to Kemp’s desk for approval, contingent upon the Senate’s concurrence with recent amendments, potentially as soon as Friday. This measure was met with opposition from most Democrats and some Republicans.
This development aligns with a commitment Kemp made approximately 18 months prior to the influential Georgia Chamber of Commerce, which has been a staunch supporter. The legislative package, often referred to as tort reform, garnered unexpected backing in the Senate following Kemp’s revisions. Before the vote, Kemp issued warnings to Republican opponents, suggesting that he might sponsor primary challengers against them.
Substantial financial resources have fueled lobbying efforts both supporting and opposing the bill. Kemp and his proponents assert that it will prevent automatic hikes in insurance premiums. However, experts remain skeptical about this outcome.
Republican House Speaker Jon Burns praised lawmakers for “working tirelessly” to devise a bill that balances business protection from baseless lawsuits with the upholding of legitimate claims.
Simultaneously, Burns revealed plans for a House committee to investigate the practices of insurance companies, particularly their rate-setting processes.
Democratic Representative Tanya Miller of Atlanta criticized the bill, labeling it as “one of the worst-drafted bills” she has encountered in her legal career. She claims it was propelled by special interests responding to a “manufactured crisis.”
Another Democratic Representative and lawyer, Stacey Evans, expressed concerns, stating, “The court should welcome everyone safely, yet this bill selectively limits access.”
The bill faced setbacks in recent weeks with skepticism from several House Republicans—not confined to trial lawyers who fear the measure could obstruct justice for victims they represent. Despite further revisions by Kemp, opposition remained among some Republicans, although three Democrats cast favorable votes.
Opponents, including victims of abuse, sex trafficking, and violence, have frequently gathered at the Capitol to voice their dissent. On Thursday, they convened again with signs, sharing testimonials of abuse and violence alleged to have been dismissed by those operating businesses, recreational venues, and hotels.
“My heart is weary for the victims who might be denied their day in civil court,” said Susan Cobb, a nurse from Georgia who settled a lawsuit after her daughter, abused by a coach, was tragically found dead.
For lawsuits against businesses or property owners concerning misconduct or injuries, the proposed legislation requires proof that the owner was aware of a specific security risk and a hazardous physical condition yet failed to provide adequate security. Kemp’s recent amendments added protections for sex trafficking survivors who previously might not have been able to present cases. However, attorneys contend that victims of rape and other violence may still lack recourse against several accountable parties, a claim supporters refute.
Governor Kemp had previously stalled legislation regarding lawsuit limitations in 2024, opting instead to authorize a law for data collection on lawsuit outcomes. He has also hosted roundtable discussions with business, trucking, apartment, and healthcare sector representatives who claim they have suffered from unjust lawsuits.
“Family-run businesses and farms are apprehensive,” stated House Republican Majority Whip Representative James Burchett.
The new bill introduces stricter guidelines for specifying the financial implications of noneconomic damages like pain and suffering. It also allows jurors to consider contributions from insurance and third parties towards medical expenses and calls for separate trial processes to determine fault and damages.