Dangerous tort reforms

Two tort-reform bills making their way through Congress are the inevitable, but regrettable, consequences of irresponsible lawsuits and aggressive, court-shopping attorneys. Unfortunately, they stem from the many successful, and justified, lawsuits against tobacco companies.

Once this trend begins, however, there may be no end.

One of the bills, which now has passed both houses of Congress and awaits the president's signature, outlaws liability lawsuits against gun manufacturers. This stems from ridiculous suits that sought to hold those manufacturers responsible for crimes committed with the guns they produce; guns which are, of course, legal products.

Americans ought to react strongly against laws that offer blanket protections to industries from legal action. This case, however, is the least offensive of the two. At least the gun lobby can claim specific constitutional protections for its products. The Second Amendment can't simply be argued away in a courtroom.

It's the other bill that seems particularly ridiculous. It would make it illegal for overweight people to sue fast-food restaurants for making them that way.

No one can convincingly argue that the overconsumption of fast foods hasn't contributed to the nation's obesity problem. But, even accounting for clever advertising and inexpensive "super sized" portions, food consumption remains a matter of personal choice. People may claim that french fries and milk shakes are addictive, but there is little scientific evidence to support that theory.

Even so, it seems a little dangerous to pass laws that specifically prohibit lawsuits of one particular kind or another. Lawyers can be crafty and persuasive. Anti-fast food suits can deftly equate hamburgers with cigarettes. But there may someday arise a legitimate claim that never will be heard because an entire industry has been protected.

Our worry is about what might come next. Could the alcohol industry ask for similar protections? After all, it is known for promoting "responsible" drinking. Should the industry be held liable for its advertising methods, which seem to target under-aged teens? How about its soda-pop flavored drinks?

For years, arguments have raged over whether bartenders or tavern owners should be held liable for people who drink too much and then later hurt someone by driving drunk. But drinking is a matter of personal choice, as well.

We wish Americans had more faith in their own legal system. By restricting the right to seek recourse, Congress may unwittingly be opening the way for wrongs that can't be foreseen to go unpunished.