Arguments Against Tort Reform

Tort reform is limiting the amount of punitive damages that can be recovered in a tort case making it harder for the plaintiff to have a case. Those against tort reform want no limit on the amount that can be recovered. I am against tort reform and believe there should be no limit on the damages that can be recovered. One of the goals of tort reform is to limit the amount of lawsuits that qualify to save the courts money. Some people in society believe the courts should hear more important cases. No individual should be able to decide whether a tort case is important enough to be in court. The Due Process Clause states that no person should be deprived of “life, liberty, or property,” which gives a person a chance to tell their behalf. Therefore in tort cases, the injured should be given the same chance to tell their behalf, regardless of the importance of a case. Every case is different and therefore should be treated differently. With qualifications having to be met for a tort case to be heard by a court is depriving the injured of their free will. …show more content…
Although some cases are less serious, putting a cap on personal injury cases, overlaps the cases that actually deserve punitive damages. For example, a tort case involving a young child suffering serious burns due to an effective item that was bought from Sears. This child will never be able to live a normal life, her social life and love life will forever be affected. If in fact there was a limit on punitive damages, what if that amount didn’t compare to the amount that this child