The legal but 'phony issue' holding up Congress, Trump in coronavirus stimulus showdown

While Republican and Democratic lawmakers — along with the White House — spar over new stimulus legislation, one of the sticking points is a GOP-backed federal immunity law that would protect schools and businesses from COVID-19-related lawsuits.

The law, titled Safeguarding America's Frontline Employees To Offer Work Opportunities Required to Kickstart the Economy, or Safe to Work Act, has contributed to an impasse that includes fights over key provisions like renewing extra unemployment benefits and pandemic aid to states.

If enacted, the current version of the law would apply retroactively, barring actions from December 2019 through December 2024. It would also curb allegedly injured parties from sending demand letters to businesses in attempts to recover damages by giving businesses their own cause of action for “meritless” claims.

Yet according to some experts, the stalemate is little more than political theater and not an unmovable red line for either party. Both sides realize that with or without the law, COVID-19 personal injury and wrongful death cases are nearly impossible to prove.

“I think there’s a phony issue out there,” Richard Bell, a plaintiff’s attorney, told Yahoo Finance in a recent interview.

What doesn’t ring fully true is the Republican argument that in order to reopen, businesses and schools need additional assurance that they’ll avoid financial risks that come with defending coronavirus-related lawsuits. Meanwhile, Democrats contend that such a law would snatch viable avenues away from injured plaintiffs, which actually already exist.

‘More theater than substance’

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi puts on her face mask to protect from the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) after taking part in a ceremonial swearing-in for Rep. Mike Garcia (R-CA) in Washington, U.S., May 19, 2020. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque     TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi puts on her face mask to protect from the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) after taking part in a ceremonial swearing-in for Rep. Mike Garcia (R-CA) in Washington, U.S., May 19, 2020. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY

However, businesses, schools and individuals covered by the proposed law already hold a trump card that will ultimately protect them from most ensuing liability. Plaintiffs would be hard pressed to maintain a legally sustainable cause of action.

“How are you going to prove it?” Bell asked of those who would look to hold an entity legally responsible for coronavirus injury. “Even if I prove gross negligence, how am I going to prove causation here?”

Benjamin Edwards, associate professor of law at UNLV William S. Boyd School of Law characterized fears about a wave of COVID-19 related lawsuits as “overblown, because it’s going to be very difficult for someone to prove where they contracted COVID.”

Still, Edwards told Yahoo Finance the proposed statute appears to be an overly aggressive “grab bag” of lawsuit-blocking provisions — and may lead to increased health risks from businesses that relax their adherence to safety guidelines.

The proposal “is more theater than substance,” he said.