As Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp's litigation overhaul bills moves through Legislature, other bills join in on effort

ATLANTA — If you own a company in Georgia, it’s an opportune time to seek protection from expensive lawsuits.

As Gov. Brian Kemp’s legislation to overhaul the civil litigation system moves through the General Assembly, several other industries are requesting special legal safeguards.

A handful of bills would shield companies that emit dangerous chemicals into Georgia waters; spray people, plants and pets with pesticides; and operate ridesharing businesses.

Since taking office under the Gold Dome, state Rep. Tyler Paul Smith, a Republican from Bremen, said there have been various pushes to change the state’s civil litigation system. But with Kemp’s legislation — Senate Bill 68 — gaining steam, there are seemingly more efforts than ever.

“When it rains, it pours,” Smith said.

House Democratic Caucus Chair Tanya Miller of Atlanta, who has been a leader for the minority party in legislative hearings on the bill, used another comparison: “The sharks are circling the blood in the water.”

State Rep. Kasey Carpenter, a Republican from Dalton, seized on the momentum behind the governor’s initiative by sponsoring House Bill 211, which aims to shield manufacturers from lawsuits over their use of per- and poly fluoroalkyl chemicals, also known as PFAS.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has determined these toxic “forever chemicals” accumulate in humans over time and likely cause cancer and other illnesses.

Carpenter’s bill sought to preemptively protect the carpet industry in northwest Georgia, where cities are beginning to grapple with expensive cleanup to remove decades worth of contamination. Georgia municipalities and public utilities, including in Dalton, have already filed lawsuits against manufacturers in an effort to get financing for the costly repairs.

The legislation would have classified the carpet manufacturers, municipalities and others as so-called “PFAS receivers” and shield them from liability. The bill would not protect chemical manufacturers and therefore not shut the door on future lawsuits against companies that manufactured the chemicals, such as 3M and DuPont.

“I’m not saying, ‘don’t sue the chemical companies.’ They created it and lied to everybody. But if you want to sue every manufacturer that’s touched this product, you might as well just sue everybody, and we can all start suing each other, because that’s what’s going to happen,” Carpenter told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

This 2025 session is the first in a two-year legislative cycle. Although the bill didn’t reach a House floor vote, it could next year.

Carpenter also cosponsored House Bill 678, which would protect cities from being sued over the actions of an employee under a legal doctrine known as sovereign immunity. The state and county governments are already protected by sovereign immunity in Georgia.

Lawsuits arising out of police pursuits, for example, are much harder to bring against state and county police than municipal police departments. A recent AJC investigation found that lawsuits against the Georgia State Patrol over its handling of pursuits rarely gain traction for this reason.

“It’s the taxpayers that are paying for it,” Carpenter said. “I mean it’s not like the money’s coming out of the mayor’s pocket to pay your claim.”

Another measure, Senate Bill 144, would protect manufacturers from being held liable for failing to warn consumers of health risks regarding pesticides, above those already known to the EPA.

During a hearing, state Rep. Stacey Evans, a Democrat from Atlanta, said she was concerned that a company’s research about its own product can speed ahead of government administration, letting companies off the hook from harm.

“We’ve got an industry player that knows from their own research that something is harmful and they continue to be able to sell it consumers, without giving that equal knowledge to them. This bill cuts off consumers' ability to do anything about it if they get hurt,” she said.

State Sen. Sam Watson, a Republican from Moultrie who sponsored the bill, said companies would not be protected from misrepresenting information to customers.

Miller, the House Democratic caucus chair, said companies are taking advantage of the current political environment to get the state to protect them from lawsuits, leaving consumers without legal recourse.

“There are multiple industries that are riding the wave of the propaganda machine and insinuating somehow that lawsuits are impacting, negatively impacting, their business or their industry, without any data to support it,” she said.

Kemp and his allies have argued that enacting changes to how lawsuits are handled in the state is necessary to protect businesses from “frivolous” lawsuits costing them millions of dollars to settle.

“The trial lawyers are a very organized political machine to go up against, and you know, [we] just hadn’t had much luck until, obviously, the governor got behind it,” Carpenter said.

Fewer than 1% of the injury lawsuits filed in Georgia result in awards of $10 million or more, according to state court data and verdict reports, the AJC found.

Kemp has maintained his legislation wouldn’t prevent citizens who feel they have been wronged from pursuing justice.

“It protects people who received and applied the chemicals in their businesses who didn’t know (that PFAS were dangerous) and the people who are cleaning it up afterwards,” said Mark Rogers, a lawyer for carpet manufacturer Mohawk Industries Inc., during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on the bill in early March.

Rogers said Mohawk was unaware of the dangers posed by the PFAS chemicals the company had used for decades.

Still, the proposed changes to the legal system could have consequences, said Mark Woodall, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, which advocates for environmental causes.

“If you weaken the regulatory system, then civil liability is about the only remaining way to get justice,” he said. “Everyone wants to avoid liability.”

While cracking down on lawsuits against businesses, several other Republican-led efforts would allow citizens to sue an individual or their local government if they are engaging in a behavior they didn’t like.

For example, Senate Bill 163 would allow anyone penalized for leaving their guns in unlocked cars to sue a municipality for up to $50,000. The bill, sponsored by Sen. Colton Moore, a Republican from Trenton, passed the Senate along party lines.

Senate Bill 21 would allow anyone who has been “harmed” by immigrants in the country illegally to sue their local government if they enacted “sanctuary” policies that shield migrants from deportation. It also passed, largely along party lines, but is moving further along in the legislative process.

Kemp’s litigation overhaul is still the big prize for those seeking more restraint on lawsuits. That bill, which already passed the Senate, could reach a full vote in the House as soon as Thursday.