This bill sets standards for negligence claims related to COVID-19 transmission, clarifying that businesses are not automatically negligent for operating during the pandemic. It requires juries to consider whether a business acted with reasonable care, rather than simply determining that transmission occurred on the premises.
Andy Biggs
Representative
AZ-5
The "Protecting Businesses From Frivolous COVID Lawsuits Act of 2025" sets standards for negligence in COVID-19 transmission lawsuits. It requires juries to be instructed that simply operating a business does not constitute negligence. This aims to protect businesses from lawsuits where they are accused of negligence simply for being open during the pandemic.
COVID Lawsuits Shielded: New Bill Says Just Opening a Business is 'Reasonable'
The "Protecting Businesses From Frivolous COVID Lawsuits Act of 2025" aims to shield businesses from negligence lawsuits related to COVID-19 transmission. The core of this bill centers on how juries are instructed in federal civil cases where someone sues a business, claiming they got COVID-19 because of the business's actions (or inactions).
Jury's Out
This bill changes the game by setting a very specific jury instruction. Basically, it tells juries to use the 'reasonable person' standard—did the business act like a 'reasonable person' would under the circumstances? Okay, sounds fair enough, but here's the twist: the bill explicitly states that simply opening a business is, by definition, 'reasonable.' This means a business can't be found negligent just for being open during the pandemic (SEC. 2). It potentially limits claims against businesses that stayed open, regardless of what other safety steps they did or didn't take.
Real-World Rollout
Imagine a local grocery store that stayed open during the height of the pandemic. Under this law, even if they didn't enforce mask mandates or social distancing, the mere fact that they were open is considered reasonable. So, if a customer caught COVID-19 and tried to sue, claiming the store was negligent, this law makes that case much harder to win. The jury must be instructed that opening the business in itself wasn't negligent. This could impact everyone from restaurant workers to retail employees to customers, making it trickier to hold businesses accountable for COVID-19 safety practices.
The Bottom Line
While the stated goal is to protect businesses from what it calls 'frivolous' lawsuits, this bill might make it significantly harder for individuals to seek compensation if they believe a business's carelessness led to them contracting COVID-19. It essentially shifts a large part of the responsibility for managing COVID-19 risk from businesses onto individuals. The law raises a crucial question: how do we balance protecting businesses with ensuring they maintain a safe environment during a pandemic? This bill seems to lean heavily towards protecting the businesses, potentially at the expense of individual claims of negligence.