A GOP-led bill being debated in the House of Representatives targeting civil litigation reform has sparked backlash from conservative groups warning of privacy concerns. The legislation, known as the Litigation Transparency Act of 2025 (HR 1109), has drawn sharp criticism from conservative organizations such as the Tea Party Patriots Action, which argue that the proposed disclosure mandates threaten donor privacy, chill free speech, and make it more difficult for Americans of modest means to hold large corporations accountable.
In a letter sent earlier this week, Tea Party Patriots Action urged the House Judiciary Committee to reject HR 1109, introduced by GOP Reps. Darrell Issa, Scott Fitzgerald, and Mike Collins. The letter, signed by over a dozen conservative groups including America First Legal, Defending Education, Heartland Institute, and the American Energy Institute, warns that ‘sweeping disclosure mandates in this bill threaten our core American principles of personal privacy, confidentiality, and freedom of speech and association.’
Proponents of the legislation, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, argue that the bill is a ‘vital step toward ensuring that our legal system remains a tool for justice rather than being a playground for hidden financial interests.’
Issa, one of the sponsors of the bill, told Fox News Digital that there is ‘misinformation’ circulating about what the bill actually proposes to do. He argued that the legislation does not seek to overturn historical protections such as the NAACP v. Alabama ruling, which safeguarded the privacy of nonprofit donors, and that the bill’s focus is solely on disclosing third-party investors in lawsuits.
Meanwhile, advocacy-oriented nonprofits and legal networks argue that the bill would undermine their ability to hold large corporations accountable for harmful practices. These groups rely on non-recourse or outcome-contingent funding models to finance litigation against powerful entities such as woke corporations and large tech companies.
Conservative groups have also expressed concern that the proposed disclosure requirements could expose private financial arrangements to harassment and retaliation, particularly from politically motivated actors. In a recent op-ed in The Hill, Alliance Defending Freedom founder Alan Sears argued that forced disclosure of private associations undermines fundamental freedoms, citing Supreme Court decisions that support this view.
The House Judiciary Committee is set to mark up the bill on Thursday, with Rep. Fitzgerald reaffirming Congress’ intent to protect the First Amendment rights of those who contribute to political groups and religious organizations, in line with the Citizens’ United ruling.