Despite strong backing from business and insurance lobbies, the Texas Legislature adjourned its 2025 session without passing Senate Bill 30 (S.B. 30), a sweeping tort reform measure aimed at curbing so-called “nuclear verdicts.” Though the bill passed both chambers in different forms, the two versions could not be reconciled in the conference committee, effectively killing the legislation before the May 29 deadline.¹
For defense practitioners, this marks not just the end of a high-profile bill—it signals the current political ceiling for major tort reform in the state of Texas.
Background: What S.B. 30 Proposed
S.B. 30, authored by Senator Charles Schwertner and backed by Texans for Lawsuit Reform (TLR), sought to reshape how juries evaluate damages in personal injury cases dramatically.²
The bill’s original version would have:
- Capped noneconomic damages by restructuring them into two categories: (1) physical pain and suffering, and (2) mental/emotional anguish.³
- Imposed new evidentiary limits on how plaintiffs prove medical damages, tying recovery to actual payments made or a percentage (typically 150%–300%) of Medicare rates.⁴
- Targeted the use of Letters of Protection (LOPs), alleging they artificially inflated medical billing and jury awards.⁵
Supporters framed the bill as necessary to rein in outlier verdicts exceeding $10 million—dubbed “nuclear verdicts”—which they argued drive up insurance premiums for businesses and consumers alike.⁶
Legislative Journey: From Priority Bill to Political Casualty
Introduced on March 13, 2025, S.B. 30 passed the Senate on April 16 with substantial support.⁷ It then moved to the House, where members amended it significantly. The revised version diluted the original damage reforms and included a provision granting juries greater discretion in assessing evidence.⁸
The Senate refused to concur with the House changes, sending the bill to the conference committee on May 29. But the conferees failed to reach a compromise by the session’s end.⁹ Despite being labeled a priority by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, the bill died on the calendar.¹⁰
Public Debate: Insurance vs. Accountability
The bill ignited strong reactions across the legal and political spectrum.
Business groups, including the Texas Civil Justice League and the Lone Star Economic Alliance, argued the bill would restore fairness by limiting “abuse” of inflated medical billing and emotional appeals in court.¹¹ They claimed that overly large verdicts undermine trust in the civil system and burden small businesses with rising costs.¹²
Opponents—ranging from plaintiffs’ attorneys and survivors of sexual assault to former judges—warned that the bill would gut longstanding rights to full and fair compensation.¹³ Critics noted that less than 5% of verdicts in Texas since 2021 exceeded $10 million, with the median personal injury award hovering near $38,600.¹⁴ Moreover, TLR’s own lobbyist admitted during testimony that S.B. 30 would not reduce insurance premiums.¹⁵
One widely cited example involved a mother whose child suffered severe burns from a defective product. Under S.B. 30’s structure, the family would likely recover a fraction of what juries typically award today for pain, disfigurement, and future care.¹⁶
Takeaways: What The Failure of S.B. 30 Means Going Forward
- The political window for broad tort reform is narrow. Despite control of both chambers by Republicans, internal disagreement and growing public scrutiny of corporate lobbying derailed the bill.
- The trial narrative matters. Opponents successfully framed S.B. 30 as a corporate bailout at the expense of real people, especially children, assault survivors, and families facing tragedy.
- Tort reform advocates may shift tactics. Rather than seeking sweeping reforms, proponents may pursue piecemeal legislation or judicially driven doctrines, particularly in areas such as medical billing and evidentiary standards.
- The issue isn’t dead. Groups like TLR and the Texas Trucking Association have already vowed to push for the bill’s reintroduction in the next session.¹⁷
Conclusion
The 2025 session may be remembered not for what changed, but for what didn’t. S.B. 30’s failure shows the limits of top-down tort reform in today’s Texas. For now, plaintiffs’ attorneys retain the ability to seek full noneconomic damages, and juries remain empowered to evaluate claims on their merits. But the battle over civil justice policy is far from over.
1. Texas Tribune, Effort to Curb Personal Injury Lawsuit Payouts Dies in the Texas Legislature, June 1, 2025.
2. Southeast Texas Record, Texas Civil Justice League President on SB 30 and Personal Injury Reform, Apr. 24, 2025.
3. Law360, Texas Bill Aimed at Curbing Juries’ Injury Verdicts Fails, June 2, 2025.
4. Id.
5. Id.
6. Id.; see also Texas Civil Justice League, SB 30 Commentary, Apr. 24, 2025.
7. 2025 Bill Tracking Report, TX S.B. 30 (Tex. Leg. 2025).
8. Texas Tribune, supra note 1.
9. Id.
10. Id.
11. Southeast Texas Record, Texas Bill Takes Aim at Inflated Medical Damages, Apr. 17, 2025.
12. Id.
13. Palestine Herald-Press, Letter to the Editor: SB 30 is Selling Out Texans to Protect Insurance Profits, May 7, 2025.
14. Austin American-Statesman, SB 30 Aims at ‘Nuclear’ Verdicts, Hits Victims, Apr. 27, 2025.
15. Id.
16. Id.
17. Law360, supra note 3.
