Protecting Businesses From Frivolous COVID Lawsuits Act of 2025
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
ID: B001302
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
January 3, 2025
Introduced
Committee Review
đź“Ť Current Status
Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.
Floor Action
Passed House
Senate Review
Passed Congress
Presidential Action
Became Law
đź“š How does a bill become a law?
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Bill Summary
(sigh) Oh joy, another bill that's about as subtle as a sledgehammer to the face. Let me dissect this... abomination.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of HR 99 is to shield businesses from accountability for their own negligence during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective is to make it virtually impossible for individuals to sue companies that recklessly exposed them to the virus, under the guise of "protecting" businesses from "frivolous lawsuits." How noble.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires a specific jury instruction in federal civil cases involving COVID-19 transmission claims. The instruction essentially tells jurors that:
1. Businesses are not liable if they acted like "reasonably careful" people (whatever that means). 2. Opening a business during the pandemic is, by itself, considered reasonable behavior (because, you know, profits over people). 3. Jurors can't find businesses negligent solely because they stayed open for business (even if they ignored safety protocols).
In other words, this bill is a get-out-of-jail-free card for companies that prioritized profits over public health.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include:
* Businesses that want to avoid accountability for their actions (or lack thereof). * Lobbyists who represent these businesses and are probably writing the checks for our esteemed lawmakers. * Individuals who contracted COVID-19 due to business negligence, but will now have a much harder time seeking justice.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a symptom of a deeper disease: corporate greed and the willingness of politicians to enable it. By shielding businesses from accountability, we're essentially telling them that they can prioritize profits over people without consequences. This will lead to more reckless behavior, more infections, and more deaths.
But hey, who needs personal responsibility when you have lobbyists and campaign contributions?
In conclusion, HR 99 is a masterclass in legislative malpractice. It's a bill that says, "We don't care about your health or safety; we only care about lining the pockets of our corporate donors." And if you believe otherwise, well... I have a bridge to sell you.
Diagnosis: Terminal stupidity, with a side of corruption and greed. Prognosis: Poor.
Related Topics
đź’° Campaign Finance Network
Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No organization contributions found
No committee contributions found
Donor Network - Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 27 nodes and 30 connections
Total contributions: $116,250
Top Donors - Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount
Project 2025 Policy Matches
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.
Introduction
— 492 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Strategic National Stockpile. The President should invoke the Defense Pro- duction Act,79 which is a form of temporary takeover of private enterprises, only in the gravest circumstances. The Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) should be reformed to consider the potential supply chain disruptions of pandemics or global conflicts. Also, during the COVID pandemic, many states received ventilators from the SNS and hoarded them in places where a rush of COVID patients needing ven- tilators never materialized. The SNS should clarify its mission as supplier of last resort to the federal government, state governments, or first responders and key medical staff and should not portray itself as serving the public as a whole. OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) The Office of General Counsel is essential to ensuring that HHS is operating within the bounds of its numerous governing statutes. However, legal caution can outweigh practical necessity and often slows processes and decisions when time is of the essence. Such problems were evident both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Internal processes should be reformed to streamline necessary legal determinations during crises, and general processes should be reviewed for effi- ciency. OGC should also: l Rescind its PREP Act liability memo. OGC issued a PREP Act liability memo that suspended application of civil rights and other laws in the context of the administration of covered countermeasures during the pandemic. It should be rescinded as contrary to law. l Rescind efforts to curtail OCR authority over conscience and religious freedom. All OGC memos and Federal Register notices of organization or delegations of authority moving any OCR conscience and religious freedom enforcement to OGC, including RFRA, should be rescinded, and independent authority over these matters should be restored to OCR. l Encourage DOJ to repeal OLC memos allowing abortion funding despite Hyde and memos allowing federal enclave immunity to perform abortions despite the Assimilative Crimes Act.80 l Rescind legal analysis that authorized HHS to impose a moratorium on rental evictions during COVID. l Rescind the OGC legal analysis saying that the injunction in Bowen v. American Hospital Association81 prevents any proposed HHS regulations or enforcement actions concerning the denial of care — 493 — Department of Health and Human Services to newborn infants with disabilities by covered health care entities without or against parental consent. l Rescind the legal analysis supporting the Biden Administration’s decision to dismiss the University of Vermont Medical Center case dealing with the forced participation of a nurse in abortion in violation of law. l Rescind the legal analysis restoring $200 million in Medicaid funds to California after having been found to be in violation of the Weldon Amendment by OCR. OFFICE OF GLOBAL AFFAIRS (OGA) The Director of the Office of Global Affairs should have the title of Assistant Secretary so that he or she can adequately represent HHS and the Secretary and serve as the lead on global health diplomacy for the government. The designation “Director” is not understood to indicate the leadership role that this position holds in the international arena. In addition: l All divisions that work on international health efforts should be responsive to requests and direction from the Assistant Secretary with coordination for all health diplomacy emanating from OGA. l OGA should have a clear and consistent voice for the Administration’s pro-life and pro-family priorities in all international engagements. l OGA should hold oversight authority for implementation of the Mexico City policy throughout all divisions. l Every effort should be made to locate all OGA staff in the same building for better oversight and communication. l Health attachés in various global locations should be trained in the Administration’s policies with clear expectations communicated and with accountability, including replacement, when their conduct and advocacy are contrary to Administration policies and programmatic priorities. OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS (OCR) Conscience Enforcement. Existing statutes that protect rights of conscience (such as the Church, Coats–Snowe, and Weldon amendments) do not explicitly
Introduction
— 613 — Department of Labor and Related Agencies l Congress must amend the law so that employers can again have the freedom to make hiring Americans a priority. Despite the significant advantages that preferring citizens over (work-authorized) aliens in hiring would provide to American workers, businesses, and the country at large, such a practice has been illegal since 1986.25 This makes no sense. Alternative View Some conservatives believe that the government has a duty to limit its spending in order to limit how much it takes from American families. This means that when the government spends money, it must find the most econom- ical and effective way to do so. Excessive government spending will be borne by American workers and families through reduced incomes and purchasing power. There may be good reasons to require a certain percentage of American workers on federal contracts, but those decisions should be based on economy and efficiency as opposed to arbitrary quotas. Visa Fraud. American businesses that commit visa fraud and hire illegal immi- grants should not be the beneficiaries of federal spending. But a 2020 report by the Department of Labor’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) examined the depart- ment’s process for excluding employers who commit visa fraud and abuse from federal contracts and found much to be desired. l To protect the American workforce from unscrupulous immigration lawyers, employers, and labor brokers, the department must follow the recommendations of the OIG and institute more robust investigations for suspected visa fraud and speedier debarments for those found guilty. INTERNATIONAL LABOR POLICY Leveling the International Playing Field for Workers. As recent decades of intense import competition and offshoring have made clear, American workers suffer when the U.S. opens its markets to foreign nations’ minimal labor standards and exploitative conditions. While federal law already prohibits the importation of goods produced with forced labor, the prohibitions are toothless without effective means of enforcement and cover only the most basic of workers’ rights. The Trump Administration and its United States Trade Representative (USTR) took unprece- dented steps to redress the issue for workers. The U.S.–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) contained the strongest and most far-reaching labor provisions of any free trade agreement (FTA), with protections and commitments to reduce labor abuses and raise wages. It also established new modes of enforcement. For future FTAs, the USTR should replicate the labor provisions of USMCA, especially the provisions to: — 614 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Eliminate all forms of forced or compulsory labor. l Protect workers’ rights to organize and participate voluntarily in a union without employer interference or discrimination. l Create a rapid-response mechanism to provide for an independent panel investigation of denial of labor rights at covered facilities. l Shift the burden of proof by presuming that an alleged violation affects trade and investment, unless otherwise demonstrated. For future authorizations of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), the President should urge Congress to: l Create mechanisms for supply-chain transparency. l Institute a general prohibition on forced labor conditions. Investigate Foreign Labor Violations That Undermine American Work- ers. The United States’ embrace of globalization has exposed American workers to unfair competition from nations with cheap, abundant, and often exploited labor. American workers have, as a consequence, seen their earning power erode. While negotiating stronger trade agreements with robust labor provisions should be the primary tool with which to regulate international labor competition, the federal government can also take steps to identify the worst labor abuses and rule breakers. DOL’s Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB) plays a critical role in monitor- ing and enforcing the labor provisions of U.S. trade agreements and trade preference programs as well as investigating child labor and human trafficking violations. l The next Administration should focus ILAB investigations on foreign labor violations that do the most to damage American workers’ earning power, specifically regimes that engage in child and forced labor, fail to protect workers’ organizing rights, and permit hazardous or otherwise exploitative working conditions. Alternative/Additional View. Conservatives share a belief in protecting and pro- moting American workers and their families and orienting international policies with Americans’ interests first. Some conservatives believe that the best way to put Amer- ica first is by making America more attractive. In addition to restrictions imposed on other countries, removing existing barriers to American manufacturing, employ- ment, and commerce can help American workers, entrepreneurs, and families.
Introduction
— 594 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Exemptions from Regulations for Small Business. Burdensome regulations have anti-competitive effects. In general, larger, higher-margin businesses are better able to absorb the costs of regulatory compliance than are small businesses, and under the Biden Administration, big-business lobbies have affirmatively embraced certain regulations (such as the COVID vaccine mandate for private employers) to reduce competition from smaller businesses. Research suggests that labor regula- tions may pose the highest aggregate regulatory cost for small businesses. l The labor agencies should exercise their available discretion and duties under the Regulatory Flexibility Act12 to exempt small entities from regulations where possible. l Congress should enact legislation increasing the revenue thresholds at which the National Labor Relations Board asserts jurisdiction over employers to match changes in inflation that have occurred since 1935 and better reflect the definition of “small business” used by the federal government. l Congress (and DOL, in its enforcement discretion) should exempt small business, first-time, non-willful violators from fines issued by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration. EDUCATION AND VOCATIONAL TRAINING Apprenticeships. The next Administration should return to prior policy and implement an industry-recognized apprenticeship program separate from the Registered Apprenticeship Program (RAP) and explore how best to modernize, streamline, and eliminate duplication in the RAP. For roughly 80 years, the RAP— which requires conforming to government standards and includes federal funding, tax credits, and other federal resources—has dominated apprenticeship programs in the U.S. Organizations across the political spectrum have noted that the overly burdensome requirements of RAPs have contributed to limiting them to legacy trades, failing to meet growing industry demands such as in health care and tech- nology. A 2017 study estimated that the number of occupations commonly filled through apprenticeships could nearly triple (from 27 to 74), that the number of job openings filled through apprenticeships could expand eightfold (to 3.2 million), and that the occupations ripe for apprenticeship expansion could offer 20 percent higher wages than traditional apprenticeship occupations. The Trump Administration expanded apprenticeship options through the cre- ation of the Industry-Recognized Apprenticeship Program (IRAP), and more than 130 IRAPs were created. The Biden Administration rescinded the IRAP regulations.
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
About These Correlations
Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.