GOP bill could ‘protect wrongdoers’ from county lawsuits
Counties are sounding the alarm over a Republican bill that would strip away state law that allows them to sue pharmaceutical companies over community costs of their opioids and oil and gas companies over water contamination.
Legislation introduced by Rep. Cody Harris, R-palestine, would prevent counties from filing “public nuisance action” suits over issues that cause harm to the community.
The current law has been a crucial argument in the opioid settlements that landed counties $1.8 billion. Democratic committee members questioned the need to pass legislation that would upend counties’ future ability to sue such companies.
“Why is it necessary to limit this one avenue or cause of action when it’s obviously most recently used in a very important way that has substantial benefit to the people of Texas?” Rep. Julie Johnson, D-farmers Branch, asked Harris.
“We’re seeing the slippery slope of public nuisance being used in a way that historically has not been and was not intended,” he replied.
Harris said local governments use public nuisance lawsuits to go around the Legislature.
“This bill is really about the appropriate roles to be played by the three branches of our government,” he told the Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence Committee earlier this month.
Harris’ office did not respond to multiple requests for further comment.
Jack Walker with the Texas Trial Lawyers Association said removing counties’ ability to sue companies over impacts to their work or products on communities would leave taxpayers — voters — to pick up the costs.
“If this bill passed, it would protect wrongdoers,” he said.
Officials from blue urban
counties and deep red counties testified, all saying this would handicap their ability to hold companies accountable.
Opioid crisis
Across the nation, governments and tribes allege that Big Pharma ignited a public health crisis by aggressively marketing and selling opioids. Governments have sued these companies to compensate for years of soaring costs on hospitals, law enforcement, courts and families as communities grapple with the aftermath of addiction.
Bexar County Commissioner Justin Rodriguez said his county will receive about $22 million in opioid lawsuit settlements, all of which will be allocated to rehabilitation programs, substance abuse beds, add a drug court and to purchase Narcan, a drug used to reverse an overdose in an emergency.
“These examples illustrate having the tools and resources available to us as a county, to seek remedies, seek justice, not only make us whole and save taxpayer dollars, but ultimately save human lives,” he said.
The bill, House Bill 1372, would place responsibility on the state and regulating agencies to hold companies accountable.
Opponents of the bill pointed to the opioid epidemic to prove that there were flaws in that defense, saying regulators were the ones who approved these drugs as nonaddictive.
The bill also would limit definitions of a public nuisance. If the bill passes, counties could not take legal action against a company “regardless of whether the product is defective,” nor if “a product endangers the health, safety or welfare of the public at large or has caused injury to one or more members of the public.”
The bill would affect communities beyond the public health crisis.
Kimberly Kreider-dusek is Mcmullen County’s attorney. She said the county of 600 people strives to keep the county “good, conservative, and what we believe is the Texas way of life for people.” There are a few oil wells in her county that sit near a water source. If the bill passed, her county would have no recourse for contaminated water.
While the bill sponsor said counties have “many other tools” to remedy harm, including writing legislation, counties can only implement laws passed by the state Legislature.
“We can’t make ordinances. We can’t come up with permits to tell an oil and gas company something or to tell a trucking company, you can’t do certain things,” Kreider-dusek said.
Dallas County’s top official, Judge Clay Lewis Jenkins, said he trusts counties more than the state to take on these companies. Convincing the state to represent a small county in a lawsuit against an oil company over a chemical spill would be difficult, he said.
“Unfortunately, there’s not going to be a political price to pay if the state AG is the person making those decisions, because the votes of people in that small county don’t matter,” Lewis Jenkins said.
‘Frivolous’ lawsuits
While the vast majority of speakers opposed the bill, at least two advocated for the bill.
Glenn Hamer, with the Texas Association of Business, supported the bill, saying the state should be the one to ultimately decide whether a company is harming communities.
Nathan Morris also spoke in favor of the bill as the vice president of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, a tort reform group. He said this bill would limit “frivolous lawsuits” filed by counties.
“Other actions have been pursued by the AG. He didn’t have to sue everybody, because some companies settled without lawsuits,” Morris said.
Tiffany Bingham with the Harris County Attorney’s Office pointed to another recent example where states and counties — including Harris — sued the e-cigarette company Juul over alleged deceptive marketing to children. The governments recouped a total of $1.7 billion.
“It is a false narrative that local government entities are walking into court and filing frivolous public nuisance lawsuits,” she said.
The committee is expected to decide whether the bill reaches the House floor in a future meeting.