Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances Drug Dealers Liability Act after broad policy debate
Summary
Senate Bill 85, a first-substitute 'Drug Dealers Liability Act' creating a civil cause of action to recover costs from those who profit from illegal drug markets, was advanced to third reading after extended floor questions about definitions, geographic scope and unintended coverage.
The Utah Senate advanced the first substitute of Senate Bill 85, the Drug Dealers Liability Act, to the third-reading calendar after a lengthy floor presentation and detailed questioning about scope and definitions.
Senator Craig Taylor, sponsor of SB 85, outlined the bill's purpose: to provide a civil remedy to compensate victims of illegal-drug-related harms and to assess costs of the illegal drug market against persons who profit from it. He described categories of potential plaintiffs (including an unborn child exposed in utero, employers, medical facilities, insurers and governmental entities) and defendants (those in the chain of distribution or who knowingly participated in the illegal drug market), and enumerated types of recoverable damages including economic, non-economic and punitive damages as well as attorney fees.
The bill places stringent conditions on individual drug-user plaintiffs who wish to sue: disclosure of all information about sources six months before bringing suit, at least six months' documented abstinence, and continued abstinence during the action; otherwise they are limited to economic damages and cannot seek non-economic damages.
Several senators asked detailed procedural and substantive questions. Senator Hilliard asked whether the bill's definition of "illegal drugs" could capture alcohol or improperly prescribed medication; Senator Taylor and others clarified that the bill targets controlled substances and unlawful distribution, and that unlawful prescription practices might fall within scope if they meet the statute's definition and scienter requirements. Senator Watson raised whether an unborn child could have a cause of action; the sponsor affirmed that the text preserves that possibility.
Senator Taylor noted the bill was patterned on measures enacted in Michigan, Oklahoma and Hawaii and was supported by Citizens for Positive Community Values and other anti-drug organizations. He acknowledged the substitute should have an updated fiscal note and said the projected fiscal impact includes potential long-term savings in health care and law enforcement costs if successful.
After floor discussion and technical questions, the Senate voted to pass the first substitute to the third-reading calendar; the clerk recorded 25 ayes and no nays with several absences for that procedural vote. The bill will return for final reading at a later date.
