WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 3311

CIV PRO-GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE

104th Regular Session Introduced by Mary Beth Canty and 2 co-sponsors

Creates a rapid, anti-SLAPP like mechanism to protect GBV reporters by dismissing suits tied to reporting unless false/knowingly reckless, with fees and possible damages.

Added Co-Sponsor Rep. Nicolle Grasse
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 3311

HB 3311 — Protect Survivors Reporting Act (CIV PRO — Gender‑Based Violence)

Status: Introduced February 18, 2025; House activity through May 12, 2025 (added co-sponsors Rep. Kelly M. Cassidy and Rep. Nicolle Grasse). If enacted, amends the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure by adding Article XXIV: “Gender‑Based Violence.”

Purpose / intent

The bill creates a statutory procedure intended to protect people who report gender‑based violence (GBV) from civil suits that are filed in response to those reports. It declares a public policy goal of encouraging reporting of GBV by limiting the use of litigation to silence survivors.

Key provisions

  • Adds Article XXIV (735 ILCS 5/24‑105 through 24‑135) to the Code of Civil Procedure, titled “Gender‑Based Violence.”
  • Scope: Applies to any motion to dispose of a claim that is “based on, relates to, or is in response to” a moving party’s reporting of GBV. Examples listed include claims alleging defamation, slander, libel, harassment, and suits arising from publicly naming an alleged perpetrator.
  • Definitions: “Gender‑based violence” is broadly defined to include domestic abuse, dating violence, human trafficking, sexual assault/abuse, sexual harassment, stalking, and other acts committed at least in part because of sex or gender. “Reporting” covers disclosure to authorities, employers, schools, media, public forums, other persons, and via electronic/social media.
  • Burden and standard: If the court finds the civil action is based on the moving party’s report of GBV, it must grant a dismissal motion unless the responding party establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the report was made with knowledge it was false or with reckless disregard for its truth.
  • Non‑evidentiary items: The bill specifies that certain facts (e.g., not seeking medical care, not reporting to law enforcement, prosecutor declining to prosecute, grand jury no‑indictment, no criminal conviction, not obtaining a protective order, institutional non‑finding) are not evidence that the report was made with such knowledge or recklessness.
  • Procedure and timeline: A hearing and decision on the motion must occur within 90 days of notice; discovery is suspended while the motion is pending except, with leave, limited discovery on the issue of knowledge/recklessness. Appellate review is to be expedited.
  • Remedies and fees:
    • If the moving party prevails on the motion: the court must award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred in connection with the motion, and may grant injunctive relief; the court may also award treble and punitive damages (relief described as available only to the moving party).
    • If the motion is denied and the case proceeds, at conclusion a prevailing defendant (responding party) may recover reasonable fees and costs for defending the litigation and may recover treble damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, or other lawful relief.

Practical effect and issues to note

  • Establishes an anti‑retaliation / anti‑SLAPP–like mechanism specifically for GBV reporting with expedited procedure, fee shifting, and enhanced damages.
  • Lowers the responding party’s burden to “preponderance of the evidence” to overcome dismissal (as amended), not the higher “clear and convincing” or actual‑malice standards.
  • By suspending discovery and accelerating hearings, the bill aims to reduce litigation burden on reporters but could limit early evidence development by defendants.
  • Effective date: takes effect upon becoming law.

Legislative status highlights

  • Introduced 2/18/2025 by Rep. Mary Beth Canty; committee reviews and floor amendments followed in March–April 2025; reported favorably as substituted (4/28/2025); placed on General State Calendar (5/10/2025); read 2nd time and postponed (5/12/2025).

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.