Governor gets wish for 2025 Legislature as bill to limit lawsuit damage awards awaits his signature
Sen. Randy Robertson talks to Sen. Blake Tillery and Sen. Brian Strickland during the debate over the Kemp-backed bill creating new limits on lawsuits in Georgia. Jill Nolin/Georgia Recorder
It's official: Legislation to intended limit damages Georgia juries can award is heading to the governor's desk.
Kemp's legislative white whale, which will overhaul the way Georgia's civil litigation system functions and make it harder to prevail in lawsuits against negligent businesses, passed in a 34-21 vote Friday afternoon. The bill was forced to return to the Senate after being amended by the House, where it passed Thursday afternoon with the bare minimum 91 votes required to clear the chamber.
The new limits to damage awards outlined in Senate Bill 68 are immensely popular with business interests like the Georgia Chamber of Commerce, but it took a good deal of arm-twisting by top GOP power brokers to convince enough legislators to jump on board. At the start of the 2025 session, Gov. Brian Kemp had pledged to drag lawmakers back to Atlanta for a special session if 'meaningful, impactful' changes were not made to the state's civil justice system by the end of the regular session on April 4. His office also threatened to back primary challengers to any Republicans who opposed the bill. Ahead of the Friday vote, Republicans in the Senate briefly paused floor proceedings to assemble for a caucus meeting attended by Kemp.
The legislation also faced fierce opposition from Democrats, trial lawyers and survivors of sexual assault and human trafficking, who held waves of protests as the legislators debated the bill in the House Rules Subcommittee on Lawsuit Reform. The bill was eventually amended to carve out greater protections for survivors of human trafficking, but lawmakers in both chambers voted down amendments that would have extended similar protections to children, the elderly and sexual assault victims.
As in the House, the final Senate vote did not fall cleanly along party lines. Sen. Colton Moore, a Trenton Republican whose votes are routinely out of step with his party, spoke out against the bill, and SB 68's supporters included a few Democratic defectors: Sen. Ed Harbison of Columbus and Sen. Emanuel Jones of Decatur.
At a press conference held immediately after SB 68's passage, Kemp celebrated his legislative victory and commended lawmakers for their efforts in tackling such a complex issue.
'I was very excited to see bipartisan support in the House and in the Senate,' he said. 'I think that says a lot to the people of our state, regardless of the rhetoric that was going on around the bill and the tough politics around it, it shows that people were very thoughtful and that this is a big issue for our state.'
Senate President Pro Tem John F. Kennedy, a Macon Republican who sponsored the bill, also applauded SB 68's passage, adding that the bill will 'continue to make sure that folks from the hardworking Georgians that have to pay insurance premiums to the rest of us that all want to live in this great state are doing so in a good, fair, competitive environment.'
Democrats swiftly condemned the SB 68's passage, citing concerns that it could give companies less incentive to protect their customers.
'We know that unfortunately, at some of these businesses, people are going to be harmed,' said Senate Minority Leader Harold Jones II. 'This bill was a response to that, and that's why I say the response was either protect Georgians or protect insurance companies, and it is clear that this governor and the Republican Legislature decided to protect insurance companies.'
Trial lawyers, who warn about the unintended consequences SB 68 could create for Georgians seeking justice through the civil court system, also condemned the bill's passage.
'It will take years to know and understand the carnage this poorly written bill will leave in its wake as it is codified into law,' said Kara Phillips, a personal injury lawyer at the Atlanta firm Deitch & Rogers who has been speaking out against the bill. 'During that time numerous survivors and victims across the state of Georgia will not have access to civil justice. Today is a bad day for Georgians.'
Though the most contentious part of the lawsuit debate is over, legislators still have some work ahead of them. A companion bill, Senate Bill 69, which was also authored by Kennedy, has yet to come up for discussion in the House Rules Subcommittee on Lawsuit Reform. It is expected to come up for a vote in committee next week.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

22 minutes ago
A top Taliban official offers amnesty to Afghans who fled the country and urges them to return
A top Taliban official said on Saturday that all Afghans who fled the country after the collapse of the former Western-backed government are free to return home, promising they would not be harmed if they come back. Taliban Prime Minister Mohammad Hassan Akhund made the amnesty offer in his message for the Islamic holiday of Eid al-Adha, also known as the 'Feast of Sacrifice.' The offer comes days after U.S. President Donald Trump announced a sweeping travel ban on 12 countries, including Afghanistan. The measure largely bars Afghans hoping to resettle in the United States permanently as well as those hoping to go to the U.S. temporarily, such as for university study. Trump also suspended a core refugee program in January, all but ending support for Afghans who had allied with the U.S. and leaving tens of thousands of them stranded. Afghans in neighboring Pakistan who are awaiting resettlement are also dealing with a deportation drive by the Islamabad government to get them out of the country. Almost a million have left Pakistan since October 2023 to avoid arrest and expulsion. Akhund's holiday message was posted on the social platform X. 'Afghans who have left the country should return to their homeland,' he said. 'Nobody will harm them." "Come back to your ancestral land and live in an atmosphere of peace,' he added, and instructed officials to properly manage services for returning refugees and to ensure they were given shelter and support. He also used the occasion to criticize the media for making what he said were 'false judgements' about Afghanistan's Taliban rulers and their policies. 'We must not allow the torch of the Islamic system to be extinguished,' he said. 'The media should avoid false judgments and should not minimize the accomplishments of the system. While challenges exist, we must remain vigilant.' The Taliban swept into the capital Kabul and seized most of Afghanistan in a blitz in mid-August 2021 as the U.S. and NATO forces were in the last weeks of their pullout from the country after 20 years of war. The offensive prompted a mass exodus, with tens of thousands of Afghans thronging the airport in chaotic scenes, hoping for a flight out on the U.S. military airlift. People also fled across the border, to neighboring Iran and Pakistan. campaign against the Taliban.


Politico
22 minutes ago
- Politico
Graham wants to punish Russia with ‘bone-crushing' sanctions. It could backfire.
Sen. Lindsey Graham has pledged that his expansive sanctions bill would be 'bone crushing' for the Russian economy. But if enacted, the South Carolina Republican's proposal to impose 500 percent tariffs on any country that buys Russian energy would effectively cut the U.S. off from some of the world's largest economies — including allies in Europe. 'A 500 percent tariff is essentially a hard decoupling,' said Kevin Book, managing director of Clear View Energy Partners, an energy research firm. Graham appeared to acknowledge as much on Wednesday, when he proposed a broad carve-out for countries that provide aid to Ukraine. This exemption would spare the European Union, which continues to import almost 20 percent of its gas from Russia. But experts remain skeptical that the sky-high tariffs proposed in the Sanctioning Russia Act are in any way feasible. India and China buy roughly 70 percent of Russian energy exports, but several other countries that buy any oil, gas or uranium from Moscow — and aren't included in the carve-out — could also be exposed to tariffs under the bill. The United States, which is still reliant on imports of enriched uranium from Russia to fuel its nuclear reactors, could also run afoul of the bill. Edward Fishman, a senior researcher with the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, said countries in the crosshairs of the bill would struggle to halt their imports of Russian energy overnight. Tariffs of 500 percent on imports of goods made in China would send prices soaring, disrupt supply chains and could drive up U.S. unemployment to recessionary levels. Most likely, it would lead to a screeching halt in U.S. trade with China. 'It would hurt Americans quite a bit,' Fishman said. The legislation's goal, co-sponsored by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), is to starve Russia's war economy, which continues to earn hundreds of billions of dollars from energy exports. There is widespread support for the overall objective, with 82 senators signing on to Graham's bill so far, and growing support for a companion bill in the House. The bill is likely to change significantly as it moves through Congress and in consultations with the Trump administration, said Matt Zweig, senior policy director of FDD Action, a nonprofit advocacy organization affiliated with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. It may also take a long time. 'With sanctions legislation, you're also normally dealing with iterative processes where you would want to go through every nook and cranny,' Zweig said. Still, the widespread bipartisan support for the legislation suggests there is a high degree of support among lawmakers for tougher action on Russia. 'What Congress may be doing is pressuring the executive branch to act,' said Adam Smith, a partner at the law firm Gibson Dunn. 'There is a sense in the Senate that more sanctions on Russia need to be imposed, or ought to be imposed,' added Smith, who was a senior adviser to the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control during the Obama administration. Graham, the bill's most vocal Republican advocate, said as much in a meeting with reporters in Paris over the weekend, where he described the bill as 'one of the most draconian sanctions bills ever written.' 'The Senate is pissed that Russia is playing a game at our expense and the world's expense. And we are willing to do something we haven't been willing to do before — and that is go after people that have been helping Putin,' Graham said. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, dismissed concerns that the bill is too harsh. 'We need to make Putin understand he has to stop screwing around and come to the table. But we also need to follow it up and make clear we will be tough,' she said. Not everyone agrees. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who has long been skeptical about the effectiveness of sanctions to change the behavior of U.S. adversaries, bashed the bill on Monday as 'literally the most ill-conceived bill I've ever seen in Washington,' he said. 'It would be a worldwide embargo on 36 countries.' Meanwhile, Russia and Ukraine have made little progress on peace talks. Officials from both countries met in Istanbul on Monday and agreed to a further prisoner swap, but failed to achieve any major breakthroughs. Graham and Blumenthal visited Ukraine, France and Germany during last week's congressional recess, where they discussed the sanctions bill, as well as efforts to push Russia to the negotiating table. The proposal has been welcomed by European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen, who met with Graham in Berlin on Monday. 'Pressure works, as the Kremlin understands nothing else,' Von der Leyen said in a statement. 'These steps, taken together with U.S. measures, would sharply increase the joint impact of our sanctions.' Senate Majority Leader John Thune indicated Monday that the chamber could take up the legislation later this month. Republican senators have said they would like to secure the approval of the White House before moving forward. The proposed use of blanket tariffs to target countries that continue to do business with Russia's energy sector is novel and appears to be pitched to Trump's interests. On Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump viewed sanctions as 'a tool in his toolbox,' but declined to comment about his position on the bill. Trump appeared to be inching closer toward supporting the bill in a post on Truth Social on Wednesday, which linked to an op-ed in The Washington Post supporting the legislation. Speaking in the Oval Office on Thursday, Trump indicated he wanted lawmakers to secure his approval before moving forward with the bill. 'They're waiting for me to decide on what to do,' he said, describing the legislation as a 'harsh bill.' The president has liberally wielded tariffs to advance his foreign policy agenda, but his implementation has been spotty. Wall Street has even adopted a trading strategy referencing Trump's capriciousness called TACO, which stands for 'Trump Always Chickens Out.' Tariffs of 145 percent on China, imposed in April, lasted a month before being dramatically scaled back to make way for trade talks, which have so far failed to secure a breakthrough. As it stands, the bill includes some levers that Trump could pull to forestall the tariffs, requiring the president to make a formal determination that Russia is refusing to negotiate or has violated any future peace agreement. Nahal Toosi, Joshua Berlinger, Phelim Kine and Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Could Musk-Trump feud stoke GOP divisions ahead of midterms? ANALYSIS
Even by the standards of President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk's relationship -- an unprecedented alliance punctuated by a meme-inspired reshaping of the government, numerous rocket launches, assassination attempts, a quarter-billion-dollar political gamble and electric car photo-ops -- it's been an unusual week. For months, Musk had been the closest of Trump's advisers -- even living at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and spending time with the president's family. More recently, Trump gave Musk a congratulatory Oval Office sendoff from his work leading cost-cutting efforts in his administration, giving him a golden key with a White House insignia. But the billionaire's muted criticisms of Trump's "big, beautiful bill" grew louder and more pointed, culminating in posts Thursday on his social media platform taking credit for Trump's November win and Republicans' takeover of the Senate. "Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate," Musk posted. "Such ingratitude." Some lawmakers and Republicans worry Musk's apparent acrimonious departure from Trump's orbit could create new uncertainties for the party -- and stoke GOP divisions that would not serve Republicans well heading into a critical legislative stretch before the midterm elections. The back-and-forth attacks, which continued into the weekend and took a sharply personal turn, reverberated across a capital they have both reshaped. Trump on Friday told several reporters over the phone that he was not thinking about Musk and told ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl that Musk had "lost his mind." In the near term, Trump and the GOP are trying to muscle their signature tax and domestic policy megabill through the House and Senate, with the slimmest of margins and no shortage of disagreements. MORE: Speaker Johnson tries to protect fate of megabill from Trump-Musk crossfire Any shift on the key issues could topple the high-wire act needed to please House and Senate Republicans. A nonstop torrent of criticism from Musk's social media megaphone could collapse negotiations, harden the position of the bill's critics and even undermine other pieces of Trump's first-term agenda. "You hate seeing division and chaos," Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who represents a swing district, told ABC News about the Trump-Musk fracas. "It's not helpful." Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, called Musk a "credible voice" on "debt and spending" issues. "It's never helpful when he says those things. He's a believable person and he has a broad reach, but I think he's frustrated and people understand the context," Arrington said, predicting that both men will eventually resolve their dispute. Republican operatives watching the spat unfold this week told ABC News it is too early to say how the feud between Trump and Musk could affect the next election. The billionaire spent more than anyone else on the last election, pouring $270 million into groups boosting Trump and other Republicans up and down the ballot, according to Federal Election Commission filings. MORE: Trump-Musk feud leaves some DOGE staffers worried about their futures: Sources He already suggested he would cut back on his political donations next cycle, more than a year out from the midterm elections. In the final stretch of the 2024 race, he relocated to Pennsylvania, hosting town halls and bankrolling his own get-out-the-vote effort in the critical swing state. Since his foray into Washington, Musk has become a deeply polarizing and unpopular figure, while the president's approval rating has ticked up in some recent surveys. Groups affiliated with Musk spent $20 million this spring on the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, only for the liberal candidate to win -- signaling to some Republicans the limits of Musk's political pull. While his support may be missed by Republicans next cycle, Trump has continued to raise millions of dollars to support his future political plans, a remarkable sum for a term-limited president that underscores his central role in the party and undisputed kingmaker status. MORE: Trump tells ABC Musk 'lost his mind,' as CEO's dad says 'make sure this fizzles out' Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., who is mulling a gubernatorial bid in 2026, downplayed the tensions or political implications, suggesting that reporters "spend way more time worrying about these things than most average people." "I'm sure they will make peace," Lawler told ABC News on Friday. There were some signs of a détente. While Musk continued to hurl insults at Trump ally and critic Steve Bannon, his social media activity appeared to cool off on Friday, and the billionaire said one supporter was "not wrong" for saying Trump and Musk are "much stronger together than apart." Through nearly a decade in politics and three campaigns for the White House, Trump has demonstrated a remarkable ability to move past disputes or disagreements with many intraparty rivals and onetime critics, including some who now serve in his Cabinet. Now, some Republicans left Washington this week asking themselves if Musk is willing to do the same. Could Musk-Trump feud stoke GOP divisions ahead of midterms? ANALYSIS originally appeared on