Subcommittee advances bill allowing civil suits against out-of-state abortion pill suppliers; medical group urges changes

The Civil Justice Subcommittee voted 7-1 to send House Bill 5, as amended, to full judiciary after adding amendment 005443.

Representative Bolson, the bill sponsor in committee, said HB 5 "creates a civil cause of action, in favor of the family of an unborn child who was killed by abortion pills being sent illegally into the state," and that the amendment makes suppliers strictly liable with a stipulated damages amount of $5,000,000 intended to deter unlawful shipments.

Yarnell Beatty, general counsel for the Tennessee Medical Association (TMA), testified in opposition to amendment 005443. "TMA opposes House Bill 5, amendment 5,443," Beatty said, and proposed an alternative amendment (cited in testimony as codified differently) that would allow catastrophic damages but remove strict liability and reduce the stipulated amount. Beatty warned that strict liability and the $5 million statutory figure could erode established tort limits, chill lawful medical and pharmaceutical operations, and contribute to medication shortages used for other conditions.

Sponsor Bolson responded that the statutory text already limits the cause of action to abortion-inducing drugs delivered "to a patient" and said the $5 million figure is not a punitive fine but a compensatory award intended to deter unlawful out-of-state actors. He referenced existing state law (29-39-102 subsection H) arguing intentional wrongful conduct is not subject to the standard non-economic damage cap and that economic damages in wrongful-death cases typically are substantial.

Members questioned how the bill would distinguish lawful medical uses of the same drugs and whether lawful transporters would be chilled. Bolson pointed to the existing statutory definition of "abortion inducing drug" in the Abortion-Inducing Drug Risk Protocol Act (cited in testimony as 63-6-1102(2)) and said the bill excludes drugs prescribed for other medical indications. He also said the statute applies only where the supplier sends the drug directly to the patient; if a patient later gives pills to a third party, that falls outside the bill's scope. The committee recorded seven ayes and one no; HB 5 was advanced to full judiciary.

Witnesses and members emphasized concerns about unintended consequences for lawful medical supplies and the statutory choice to use strict liability and a fixed statutory award. The transcript recorded proposed alternative drafting by TMA and disagreement over whether the amendment would erode existing tort protections for health providers.

Votes recorded: amendment 005443 added; HB 5 advanced to full judiciary (7 ayes, 1 no).