Sponsors (22)
The bill seeks to strengthen domestic supply chains and reduce manufacturers' liability to support infrastructure availability and local jobs, but does so in ways that limit legal remedies, may reduce safety incentives, and could shift costs and uncertainty onto wildfire victims, taxpayers, and state governments.
Manufacturers and suppliers of critical infrastructure face reduced legal exposure for wildfire-related claims (liability mostly only for willful misconduct), which could lower costs for suppliers and help maintain the supply of critical equipment and services.
States and localities can prioritize domestic manufacturing of infrastructure components, improving the reliability and resilience of critical services (power, water, telecom).
Supporting domestic production could boost manufacturing jobs and local economies where components are produced.
People and communities harmed by wildfires may have limited ability to recover damages because plaintiffs must prove a manufacturer's willful misconduct to overcome the liability shield.
Insulating manufacturers and utilities from many claims could reduce incentives to design, maintain, or install safer equipment, potentially increasing wildfire risk and harm to people and property.
Prioritizing domestic inputs and shielding private firms from some wildfire liabilities could raise costs for taxpayers and consumers — through higher procurement costs and by shifting public costs onto governments if private liability is limited.
Based on analysis of 3 sections of legislative text.
Grants manufacturers of critical infrastructure equipment immunity from federal and state liability for wildfire-related losses unless plaintiffs prove willful misconduct in design or production.
Introduced June 26, 2025 by Mariannette Miller-Meeks · Last progress June 26, 2025
Grants broad immunity to manufacturers of critical infrastructure equipment from federal and state civil suits for losses caused by wildfires, unless a plaintiff can prove the manufacturer engaged in willful misconduct in the design or production of the equipment. The bill uses existing federal definitions of "critical infrastructure" and ties the definition of "manufacturer" to the critical manufacturing sector identified in recent cyber-incident reporting law.