How Trump’s Policy Plans Could Reshape Plaintiff Litigation

Written by

Tali Torigian

Legal Intelligence Quality Counsel

April 3, 2025

As the Trump administration lays out its agenda and Republican lawmakers push forward at the state level, several proposed changes, from tort reform in Georgia to federal rollbacks in consumer and environmental protections, could reshape the legal playbook for firms across the country.

We researched the policy priorities outlined in Project 2025, along with proposed federal and state-level legislation, to understand how these initiatives could impact plaintiff litigation. Darrow’s Legal Intelligence Platform and in-house attorneys will continue to monitor these changing federal policies to help plaintiff firms stay ahead of emerging risks and identify new opportunities for litigation.

Here's what you need to know now, and what to watch as these efforts gain traction.

Tort Reform: Lawsuits, But With More Hurdles

While President Trump isn’t directly leading the charge on tort reform, Republican lawmakers are moving forward with significant changes, particularly in Georgia. While these reforms are only relevant to Georgia for now, they are worth keeping an eye on as they could set a precedent for future efforts elsewhere.

‍Premises liability: Tougher standards will make it harder to hold businesses liable for injuries occurring on their property.‍
Medical damages: Juries will only see the actual amount paid for medical care, not the initially billed figures, which are often higher.‍
Pain & suffering anchors banned: Attorneys can no longer suggest large, arbitrary damage amounts to sway jurors.‍
Bifurcation of trials: Courts may now separate liability from damages, complicating litigation strategies.‍
Jurisdiction rules tightened: Stricter voluntary dismissal rules will curb forum shopping.‍
Litigation funding transparency: New disclosure requirements will make third-party litigation funding, especially from foreign entities, more visible.

At the federal level, Republicans may also revive the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act, which aims to tighten class action certification requirements and impose new transparency rules for asbestos claims. While the bill previously failed to reach a Senate vote, the new Republican majority increases the likelihood of its reintroduction.

Impact on plaintiff firms: These reforms could significantly impact plaintiff firms pursuing personal injury and class action lawsuits by making certification harder and limiting recoverable damages. Increased transparency in litigation funding could also deter investment in large-scale class actions.

Privacy: COPPA on the Chopping Block

Amendments to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) are currently stalled, with three major proposed changes likely to get cut:

‍Parental consent expansion: Stricter rules for parental approval before data collection may not take effect. The amendments require operators to disclose and obtain parental consent for specific third parties receiving children’s personal information. However, FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson criticized this requirement, arguing that new consent should only be necessary when changes materially increase risks to children’s data privacy and security.‍
Limits on data storage: Regulations restricting how long companies can store children’s data may not be implemented. The amendments propose that companies limit the retention of children’s personal information to only the time reasonably necessary to fulfill the specific purpose for which it was collected, prohibiting indefinite retention. Chair Ferguson acknowledged the good intentions behind this proposal but warned it might result in unintended negative consequences, such as the irreversible loss of digital content with personal significance.‍
Age verification exemptions: Proposed exceptions for collecting children’s data for certain purposes, such as age verification, may be removed. The amendments currently lack an exception for collecting children’s personal information solely for age verification purposes. FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson suggested adding such an exception, with a requirement to promptly delete the data once verification is complete.
‍Impact on plaintiff firms: If these amendments are revoked, plaintiff firms handling privacy-related class actions may face greater difficulty proving violations of children’s privacy rights. Weakened protections could also mean fewer cases meet the legal thresholds for litigation.

Impact on plaintiff firms: If these amendments are revoked, plaintiff firms handling privacy-related class actions may face greater difficulty proving violations of children’s privacy rights. Weakened protections could also mean fewer cases meet the legal thresholds for litigation.

To learn more about the status of COPPA, read our article: COPPA at a Crossroads

Employee Benefits: Fiduciary Rules and Investment Restrictions

Changes to retirement and investment policies are on the horizon, with a focus on national security and economic priorities. These shifts could restrict how pension funds are managed and reduce federal oversight of fiduciary conduct.‍

‍Pension fund restrictions: US pension funds may face new limitations on investing in companies linked to foreign adversaries like China and Russia, aligning with the administration’s focus on national security.‍
ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) investing limitations: The administration is expected to roll back policies allowing investments based on ESG criteria, shifting the focus away from sustainability-driven decision-making.‍
ERISA fiduciary rule changes: The fiduciary standard for retirement advisors may revert to the five-part test, redefining who qualifies as an investment fiduciary under ERISA and potentially narrowing the scope of fiduciary responsibilities.‍
Reduced federal oversight: Federal enforcement of pension and benefit protections may decline, increasing reliance on private litigation to resolve fiduciary disputes and pension mismanagement claims.

Impact on plaintiffs firms: A rollback in ERISA enforcement would likely increase private litigation opportunities, as employees facing mismanaged pension funds may have fewer regulatory protections and will need to pursue legal action for recourse. With these regulatory shifts, there may be a growing demand for legal expertise in fiduciary duty cases and pension fund mismanagement disputes.

Environmental Policy: Deregulation and Industry Expansion

Environmental protections are expected to face rollbacks, with proposed policies that would benefit industry. These changes could have major implications for mass tort and environmental litigation.

‍PFAS chemical regulations: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed drinking water limits for highly toxic PFAS compounds and designated several of the “forever chemicals” as hazardous substances. However, the Trump administration is likely to roll back these regulations. Industry groups, including the American Chemistry Council (ACC), have already sued to block these limits. Project 2025 calls for revising groundwater cleanup rules, which could weaken enforcement against PFAS contamination.‍
Narrower toxic chemical evaluations: The Trump administration is expected to limit the EPA’s ability to assess chemical risks broadly. Project 2025 calls for eliminating the agency’s system that evaluates chemical toxicity, insulating regulatory decisions from scientific review. This shift would focus solely on direct exposure risks, rather than cumulative environmental contamination, making it harder to regulate hazardous substances.‍
Fossil fuel expansion: Executive orders could prioritize oil, gas, and coal production, rolling back emissions regulations and withdrawing climate-focused executive orders, including those advancing clean energy incentives. Project 2025 aims to expedite fossil fuel permitting and eliminate barriers to pipeline construction, further cementing fossil fuel dominance in US energy policy.‍
Environmental justice data deletion: The Trump administration has removed key environmental justice tools, including the EPA’s EJScreen mapping system, from public access. The removal of these tools, and broader efforts to delete federal climate and pollution datasets, makes it harder for plaintiff firms to access reliable government-backed evidence.

Impact on plaintiffs’ attorneys: With deregulation, mass tort claims related to environmental contamination could become more critical avenues for litigation. Plaintiff firms may need to shift focus toward state environmental laws or challenge deregulation in court.

Consumer Protection: A Weakened CFPB

The Trump administration has signaled plans to shrink the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), reducing its staff to just a handful of employees. However, a court has paused further layoffs, and future hearings will determine the agency’s fate. With less federal enforcement, state regulators and attorneys general may need to take on a greater role in consumer protection oversight.

Impact on plaintiff firms: The reduction in CFPB enforcement means plaintiff firms may need to focus on state-level consumer protection laws. This could lead to increased litigation at the state level, while federal consumer class actions may decline. However, continued fraud enforcement by the FTC and DOJ may still provide some federal avenues for consumer litigation.

Turning Policy Changes into Legal Strategy

From proposed limits on damages to weaker privacy protections and reduced oversight in areas like environmental and consumer law, recent and upcoming policy changes could shift the ground beneath class action litigation. Darrow’s Legal Intelligence Platform helps plaintiffs’ attorneys stay ahead of these changes by monitoring legal developments in real time and by surfacing hidden violations as they emerge.

Powered by advanced AI technologies like large language models, natural language processing, and anomaly detection algorithms, Darrow’s Platform continuously scans massive volumes of public data, identifying patterns and outliers that point to potential harm, even when that harm is buried deep within online datasets.

When a violation occurs, the system flags it, so our legal intelligence analysts can review the information and build strong, timely, and legally grounded class action cases that reflect the most current legal standards.

Interested is partnering with Darrow on your next case? Contact us.