Support S. 1606, the Foreign Manufacturers Legal Accountability Act

Text Size

Support S. 1606, the Foreign Manufacturers Legal Accountability Act 

Why Should Foreign Manufacturers Be Less Accountable than U.S. Companies?

It’s bad enough that the U.S. has lost so many good manufacturing jobs to foreign countries.  But what are we getting for it?  Record trade deficits, toys contaminated with lead, and in one outrageous instance, a toy contaminated with the date rape drug.  From toxic drywall to pet food laced with rat poisoning, U.S. consumers need additional tools to hold foreign manufacturers accountable for the defective and sometimes very dangerous products they sell in the United States.    S. 1606, the Foreign Manufacturers Legal Accountability Act, sponsored by Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-IL), and Jeff Sessions (R-AL), would force foreign manufacturers to play by the same rules as American manufacturers and help consumers seek redress in U.S. courts for injuries or even death caused by dangerous foreign products sold in the United States.
 

Summary of S. 1606.  First, the bill would make it easier for an injured consumer to serve the foreign manufacturer with notice of pending claims.  (Service of process is the procedure employed to give legal notice to a defendant of a court’s exercise of its jurisdiction over the defendant so that person or entity can respond to the proceeding before the court.)

  • Foreign manufacturers or producers of covered products would be required to register an agent, located in a state where the company does business, who would be able to accept service of process for civil and regulatory claims. 
  • By registering the agent, the foreign manufacturer or producer also consents to state and federal jurisdiction for civil and regulatory claims.
  • Covered products include drugs, devices, cosmetics, biological products, consumer products, chemical substances, and pesticides manufactured or produced outside of the United States.
  • Additionally, the bill directs the FDA and the Department of Agriculture to jointly study the possibility of requiring foreign food producers to have registered US agents.

S. 1606 is good for U.S. Business.  U.S. businesses should not be forced to unfairly compete against foreign businesses that can easily skirt the law.  When a foreign manufacturer cannot be located, the U.S. seller may be the only party available to defend a lawsuit brought by an injured consumer.  As in the case of toxic drywall, U.S. businesses also end up shouldering monetary losses when they cannot hold foreign suppliers accountable for bad goods.  This bill would help U.S. companies by making it easier to hold foreign manufacturers accountable here where the harm occurred.

S. 1606 would help U.S. Consumers.  The bill would make it easier for U.S. consumers injured in the United States to hold foreign manufacturers accountable for the injuries they cause.  Why should a consumer have to travel to China to serve the defendant when the defendant does business in the U.S. and has an agent-importer located here?  Why should Chinese law apply to a U.S. consumer injured in their own home?   The Foreign Manufacturers Legal Accountability Act addresses both problems.

Beefing Up Inspections of Imports Isn’t Enough.  Congress should make it more difficult for dangerous foreign imports to be sold here, but beefing up inspections isn’t enough.  Consumers need additional tools to hold manufacturers accountable.  Without this accountability, the consumer is left holding the bag, and the U.S. taxpayers may be footing the bill if an injured consumer needs to rely on government assistance.   Foreign manufacturers should be held accountable for deaths and injuries they cause here in the United States.


 


The American Association for Justice
777 6th Street, NW, Ste 200 • Washington, DC  20001 • 800.424.2725 or 202.965.3500

© 2012 AAJ