• Home
  • News
  • Fortune 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia
CommentaryCongress

Democrats’ war on arbitration only benefits trial lawyers

By
Regina Thomson
Regina Thomson
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Regina Thomson
Regina Thomson
Down Arrow Button Icon
December 1, 2021, 11:26 AM ET
Lawmakers like Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-IL) want to outlaw mandatory arbitration clauses in cases of sexual harassment and discrimination, but pro-business groups say it would encourage frivolous lawsuits.
Lawmakers like Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-IL) want to outlaw mandatory arbitration clauses in cases of sexual harassment and discrimination, but pro-business groups say it would encourage frivolous lawsuits.Drew Angerer—Getty Images

One of the most influential lobbying groups in Washington gambled big in the last election cycle–and won. Now, it’s cashing in its chips with the lawmakers it helped elect.

The American Association for Justice, which represents America’s plaintiffs’ trial lawyers, shelled out over $8 million during the 2020 campaigns. Almost all of that cash–98%– went to Democrats, who gained control of the White House and Senate while retaining their House majority by the slimmest of margins.

By all indications, that money was well spent. Lawmakers are busy scheming up ways to enrich their donors–even if it means making it harder for working people to get justice or further burdening taxpayers.

Consider the ongoing attempt to ban “pre-dispute arbitration,” a popular legal recourse for workers, but one that’s hated by the trial bar, since it lets employees and employers resolve disputes by turning to a neutral third-party, rather than resorting to lengthy–and for trial lawyers, lucrative–lawsuits.

Trial lawyers and their allies in Congress have tried to characterize arbitration as a coercive, anti-worker tactic favored by the C-suite. But nothing could be further from the truth. Workers usually fare better in arbitration than they do in the courtroom.

A 2019 study found that while employees won 11% of cases that played out in courts between 2014 and 2018, they prevailed in 32% of disputes that went through arbitration. More recent data suggests that the arbitration win rate could be even higher, approaching 40%.

Employees who prevailed through arbitration also secured awards twice the size of those they received through lawsuits, according to the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform. Arbitration is also quicker: It takes about 14% less time to resolve claims in arbitration than in litigation, on average.

One of the most extreme attacks on arbitration so far is the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal (FAIR) Act, which would effectively ban the use of arbitration in all employment, consumer, antitrust, and civil rights disputes. The FAIR Act passed the House in 2019 but stalled due to a lack of support in the Senate. It was once again greenlit by the House Judiciary Committee in early November but seems unlikely to pass the Senate.

Because they can’t gain significant cross-party support for aggressive measures like the FAIR Act, Democrats have started taking up less overt, but equally unfair approaches to ending arbitration.

One example is S. 2342, the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, a bill that at first glance appears to address only workplace sexual misconduct. In reality, the legislation was so broadly worded by design that it could ban arbitration in all sorts of workplace disputes, even those that have nothing to do with harassment.

It’s effectively a backdoor FAIR Act for employment disputes, and it would achieve the trial bar’s goal of filling courtroom dockets to the brim. Lest anyone doubt what this is really about, Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), a supporter of the legislation, admitted during the recent markup of this bill that S. 2342 “is important to the trial bar.”

Democratic lawmakers are also cooking up another handout for their friends at the trial bar: a tax break. Conveniently gift-wrapped in their 2,000-page budget reconciliation bill, the proposal would cost American taxpayers $2.5 billion over the next decade by allowing contingency fee lawyers to immediately deduct their litigation expenses from their taxable income well before the conclusion of a case, thus making it financially much easier to bring a dispute to court. As the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board pointed out, this change would wrongly “subsidize more frivolous lawsuits against business.”

Legislative sausage-making is seldom a pretty process, but most Americans are willing to stomach that fact if the end results benefit them. However, in this case, there’s no upside. Ending arbitration would rob American workers and businesses of time and money while funding outsized payouts for the trial bar. And giving additional tax breaks to already deep-pocketed contingency fee lawyers smacks of naked cronyism.

Regina Thomson is the president of the Colorado Issues Coalition, as well as president of The Right Voices.

More must-read commentary published by Fortune:

  • We can’t walk blindly into the metaverse
  • I know how lobbyists make sure Americans don’t get dental care–I was one of them
  • Millennials and Gen Z are a growing force in investing. The market needs to catch up
  • Don’t let them tell you inflation is good for the poor. It’s not
  • Rise of the (fast food) robots: How labor shortages are accelerating automation

Subscribe to Fortune Daily to get essential business stories straight to your inbox each morning.

About the Author
By Regina Thomson
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon

Latest in Commentary

Ayesha and Stephen Curry (L) and Arndrea Waters King and Martin Luther King III (R), who are behind Eat.Play.Learn and Realize the Dream, respectively.
Commentaryphilanthropy
Why time is becoming the new currency of giving
By Arndrea Waters King and Ayesha CurryDecember 2, 2025
20 hours ago
Trump
CommentaryTariffs and trade
The trade war was never going to fix our deficit
By Daniel BunnDecember 2, 2025
22 hours ago
Elizabeth Kelly
CommentaryNon-Profit
At Anthropic, we believe that AI can increase nonprofit capacity. And we’ve worked with over 100 organizations so far on getting it right
By Elizabeth KellyDecember 2, 2025
22 hours ago
Decapitation
CommentaryLeadership
Decapitated by activists: the collapse of CEO tenure and how to fight back
By Mark ThompsonDecember 2, 2025
22 hours ago
David Risher
Commentaryphilanthropy
Lyft CEO: This Giving Tuesday, I’m matching every rider’s donation
By David RisherDecember 1, 2025
2 days ago
college
CommentaryTech
Colleges risk getting it backwards on AI and they may be hurting Gen Z job searchers
By Sarah HoffmanDecember 1, 2025
2 days ago

Most Popular

placeholder alt text
Economy
Ford workers told their CEO 'none of the young people want to work here.' So Jim Farley took a page out of the founder's playbook
By Sasha RogelbergNovember 28, 2025
5 days ago
placeholder alt text
Success
Warren Buffett used to give his family $10,000 each at Christmas—but when he saw how fast they were spending it, he started buying them shares instead
By Eleanor PringleDecember 2, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
North America
Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez Bezos commit $102.5 million to organizations combating homelessness across the U.S.: ‘This is just the beginning’
By Sydney LakeDecember 2, 2025
21 hours ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
Elon Musk says he warned Trump against tariffs, which U.S. manufacturers blame for a turn to more offshoring and diminishing American factory jobs
By Sasha RogelbergDecember 2, 2025
19 hours ago
placeholder alt text
C-Suite
MacKenzie Scott's $19 billion donations have turned philanthropy on its head—why her style of giving actually works
By Sydney LakeDecember 2, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
North America
Anonymous $50 million donation helps cover the next 50 years of tuition for medical lab science students at University of Washington
By The Associated PressDecember 2, 2025
23 hours ago
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.