There are concerns that President Donald Trump’s significant bill could potentially help businesses evade legal responsibility, particularly if certain provisions backed by Senator Tom Tillis (R-NC) remain intact, according to both conservatives and consumer advocates.
This provision seems to limit third-party litigation financing (TPLF), allowing outside parties to fund legal actions in return for a share of any damages awarded. Such funding has become an essential avenue for many, especially small law firms, to challenge larger companies.
The aim here might be to reduce unwarranted lawsuits, but, paradoxically, by restricting TPLF, many individuals with legitimate claims could find themselves unable to afford legal representation in court.
Growing numbers of conservative advocates see this as a serious misstep.
On Friday, the Tea Party Patriots sent a letter to the Senate Treasury Committee expressing their opposition to the current settlement measures. They joined a coalition of over 25 conservative organizations warning that these provisions could further shield certain businesses from legal accountability. The Alliance for Consumers also released a publication emphasizing how the current draft could threaten conservative efforts legally, especially with disclosure requirements tied to funding.
Furthermore, on Thursday, the family of Lt. Colonel David E. Cabrera addressed Congress, asserting that without TPLF, pursuing claims against terrorists and their sponsors would become significantly more challenging for families like theirs.
Historically, TPLF has proven effective in many legal battles. For example, notable cases have shown its impact, such as Peter Thiel financing Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit against Gawker Media, which ended in Hogan’s favor and led to Gawker’s bankruptcy.
Tillis has presented this legislation as a means to tax “foreign” investments and deter “predatory” litigation. However, the reality could be much harsher, potentially imposing a hefty 41% penalty on all litigation funding, which could effectively eliminate TPLF.
A representative for Tillis did not respond to requests for comments.
This move has received backing from several large corporations, including Amazon, Meta, Google, and Pfizer, which together push for legislation that could limit their exposure to lawsuits related to consumer issues and corporate accountability.
It’s easy to see why these companies might support such measures; their stakes are significant, as tech giants face lawsuits regarding data privacy and biases, while pharmaceutical companies aim to shield themselves from claims arising from vaccine distribution or related practices.
However, critics question how this aligns with essential American values and are urging lawmakers to reconsider this language in the bill. There’s a looming fear that bipartisan support might shield these provisions from effective scrutiny.
As this sizable bill is set for discussion in the Senate soon, the window for changes is narrowing.
