POLISCOPE
Back to feed
SB 1748FLORIDA · STATEWIDESession 2026Died in Commerce and Tourism

Proposed Limits on Firearm Liability Evidence

Original title: Evidence in Civil Actions Relating to Firearms

January 9, 2026

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Where This Stands

Currently Died in Commerce and Tourism. The next step in the legislative lifecycle is Introduced.

Procedural history

8 actions
  1. Feb 12, 2026Senate
    Now in Commerce and Tourism
  2. Feb 11, 2026Senate
    CS by Judiciary read 1st time
  3. Feb 11, 2026Senate
    Pending reference review under Rule 4.7(2) - (Committee Substitute)
  4. Feb 10, 2026Senate
    CS by Judiciary; YEAS 8 NAYS 3
  5. Feb 5, 2026Senate
    On Committee agenda-- Judiciary, 02/10/26, 12:00 pm, 110 Senate Building
  6. Jan 22, 2026SenateIntroduced
    Introduced
Show 2 earlier actions
  1. Jan 16, 2026SenateCommittee
    Referred to Judiciary; Commerce and Tourism; Rules
  2. Jan 9, 2026SenateIntroduced
    Filed

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

The Frame

What this does

If enacted, this law would restrict the types of evidence that can be used in civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers, potentially making it more difficult for plaintiffs to prove negligence or design defects based on the lack of specific safety technologies.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

Firearm manufacturers

The bill limits the types of evidence that can be used against them in product liability lawsuits.

Plaintiffs in firearm-related civil actions

The bill restricts the evidence they may present to support claims of negligence or defective design.

What changed

Last recorded activity January 9, 2026.

What's next

Introduced.

Summary

This bill would prevent plaintiffs in product liability lawsuits from using the absence of specific safety features as evidence that a firearm is defective or negligently designed. It defines several safety mechanisms, such as authorized user recognition and magazine disconnects, that manufacturers would not be required to include to avoid liability claims.

Key Facts

You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.

Why It Matters

If enacted, this law would restrict the types of evidence that can be used in civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers, potentially making it more difficult for plaintiffs to prove negligence or design defects based on the lack of specific safety technologies.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this bill protect manufacturers from all liability?
No. The bill explicitly states it does not limit liability if the claimant can prove an actual manufacturing or design defect, or that the firearm failed to operate as promised in the manufacturer's warranty.
What specific safety features are mentioned in the bill?
The bill lists authorized user recognition technology, external manual safeties, loaded chamber indicators, and s.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Voting Record

Sponsors

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift100% confidence

Limitation of Evidence in Liability Claims

The bill attempts to codify a specific evidentiary standard that excludes the absence of safety features from being used as proof of negligence.

Connected Entities

organizationCommerce and TourismCommittee currently reviewing the billMap →
locationSenate BuildingLocation of a committee meetingMap →
organizationJudiciaryCommittee reviewing the billMap →
bill_numberRule 4.7(2)Committee rule governing review processMap →

Sources

Open source document

openstates.org

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance65
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy85
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment10
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz20
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record