Lawmakers Ponder Yet Another Bid to Loosen Sovereign Immunity Strictures
Prior efforts to overcome sweeping state Supreme Court rulings barring nearly all claims were vetoed by the governor or died in committee. The author hopes the "Goldilocks" bill "gets it just right."
March 15, 2019 at 03:54 PM
4 minute read
The Georgia General Assembly is once again moving forward with legislation aimed at restoring citizens' ability to challenge the constitutionality of state laws and bring suit against state agencies and actors.
Similar bills have not fared well at the Capitol in years past: One bill resoundingly approved by both chambers died when former Gov. Nathan Deal vetoed it, and another effort died in committee during the last session. The goal is to undo the effects of several state Supreme Court rulings in recent years that have made sovereign immunity a nearly unscalable barrier for anyone attempting to sue the state.
Introducing the newest effort, which passed the House last week in a near-unanimous vote, Rep. Andrew Welch, R-McDonough, told the Senate Judiciary Committee that the earlier versions were deemed too broad or too narrow.
“We hope this one is the 'Goldilocks' version that got it just right,” said Welch, a partner with Smith Welch Webb & White.
Welch briefly recounted the series of high court rulings that he said “closed the courthouse doors” to Georgians seeking redress, starting with 2014's Georgia Department of Natural Resources v. Center for Sustainable Coast, 294 Ga. 593, which overturned years of prior court precedent in ruling that state agencies and officials were not subject to petitions seeking injunctive relief.
The justices extended that immunity in 2016 to suits for declaratory relief in Olvera v. Univ. System of Ga. Board of Regents, 298 Ga. 425.
The final nail was 2017's Lathrop v. Deal, 301 Ga. 408, in which the high court ruled that suits challenging the constitutionality of a law are barred unless specifically allowed by the Legislature and that only suits against state officers in their individual capacities could go forward.
“How repugnant to a democracy is it that we sit here as public officials and our citizens have no fundamental right to challenge the constitutionality of our laws?” Welch asked.
HB 311 was co-sponsored by a bipartisan group of representatives including Rules Committee Chairman Jay Powell, R-Camilla; Non-Civil Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Efstration, R-Dacula; and Reps. Josh McLaurin, D-Sandy Springs, and Mary Margaret Oliver, D-Decatur.
The legislation would waive sovereign immunity for petitions seeking injunctive or declaratory relief against state agencies and actors accused of violating state statutes or those challenging the constitutionality of any statute.
It would not provide any actions seeking money damages other than such actions permitted under the Georgia Tort Claims Act.
Representatives from the Georgia Municipal Association and the Association County Commission said they had problems with the bill, and a staff member of the Prosecuting Attorneys Council said their only change would be to make sure prosecutors are included in a list already shielded by sovereign immunity including judges, grand jurors and elected officials.
Georgia Trial Lawyers Association legislative affairs director Bill Clark said the bill is “as fundamental as it gets.”
“As legislators, y'all hold the keys to the courthouse doors,” Clark said. “This is your opportunity to open those doors to the public.”
Aaron Littman of the Southern Center for Human Rights said the organization is concerned that some of the bill's language will actually make it harder to bring damage claims against officers and employees of political subdivisions sued in their individual capacities.
A memo from the Southern Center said that, unlike state officers who can be sued under the Tort Claims Act, the new bill will offer “blanket protection” for local officers unless language is added creating a similar avenue for redress.
Littman also took issue with current language in the bill extending sovereign immunity to state agencies and actors sued by people in penal institutions or mental health facilities.
“This would bar prisoners and mental health patients from filing injunctions challenging the conditions of their confinement,” Littman said.
Wednesday's session was for information only, and Judiciary Chair Jesse Stone, R-Waynesboro, appointed a subcommittee to consider the legislation.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGeorgia Appeals Court Cancels Hearing in Election Interference Case Against Trump
3 minute readJustice Department Says Fulton County Jail Conditions Violate Detainee Rights
6 minute readSupreme Court Rejects Push to Move Georgia Case Against Ex-Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows
3 minute read3 GOP States Join Paid Sick Leave Movement, Passing Ballot Measures by Wide Margins
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Cars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
- 2How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 3DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 4GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 5Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250