Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
This bill adds a new section to title 28 requiring parties in civil actions to disclose any person (other than counsel) who has a legal right to contingent payments from the action’s proceeds.
Parties must produce funding agreements for in camera court review and then provide them to other named parties subject to protective orders and privilege limitations.
Exceptions cover ordinary loans (with limited interest), reimbursement of counsel’s fees, and grants; donor/member identities may be redacted unless they have payment rights.
Narrowly scoped, administratively focused reform with some bipartisan appeal but meaningful stakeholder opposition and procedural hurdles in the Senate.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear and targeted substantive change requiring disclosure of third-party contingent beneficiaries in civil actions, with specified documents, timing, and several tailored exceptions. It integrates modestly with existing procedural rules and privileges but leaves enforcement, fiscal impacts, and some definitional and procedural edge cases under-specified.
Transparency versus donor privacy and chilling effects
Transparency versus donor privacy and chilling effects
Generally supportive of disclosure to expose outside influence and protect courts from manipulation.
Concerned about chilling effects on public interest litigation and the privacy of grassroots donors.
Would want stronger safeguards to prevent donor harassment while ensuring meaningful transparency.
Views the bill as a pragmatic transparency measure that balances disclosure and privacy.
Sees value in standardized timing and supplementation duties, but worries about unclear terms and added litigation cost.
Would support with clarifications on definitions and limits to in camera review.
Skeptical of federal intrusion into private funding agreements and concerned about burdens on plaintiffs and funders.
Agrees that manipulation by third parties should be checked, but prefers narrower, market-respecting rules.
Would push for broader exceptions for commercial loans and limits on disclosure scope.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrowly scoped, administratively focused reform with some bipartisan appeal but meaningful stakeholder opposition and procedural hurdles in the Senate.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Transparency versus donor privacy and chilling effects
Narrowly scoped, administratively focused reform with some bipartisan appeal but meaningful stakeholder opposition and procedural hurdles i…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear and targeted substantive change requiring disclosure of third-party contingent beneficiaries in civil actions, with specified documents, timing, a…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.