Most of what I know about legislating I learned from watching School House Rock’s “I’m Just a Bill” song, where I met an anthropomorphic “Bill” who was hoping to become a law someday. He sang the process to the young boy who found him sitting alone on the steps of the Capitol on Capitol Hill. 

One of the reasons I’ve always loved state level politics and the Virginia General Assembly so much is that, unlike Congress, things still follow a pretty regular and predictable order in Richmond.

In 2025, 13 of my bills grew up to become laws, and they followed the School House Rock process almost exactly, with a few twists and turns thrown in. 

This month I’d like to focus on just one of those. 

Just like Bill explains to his new friend, bill ideas can come from a variety of places but often from a constituent who has had or is having a problem. 

Last September, I met with a constituent who was being sued by the person who had sexually harassed her after she filed a complaint under Title IX and testified during the ensuing investigation. The law professor who was the subject of the complaint was ultimately dismissed from the university for reasons unrelated to this complaint.

He has since filed a defamation lawsuit against her using statements made during the investigation, seeking over $100 million in damages. She believes that the suit is retaliatory and unfounded, designed to inflict extreme economic hardship rather than to win a judgement.

In many states there are ways to dispose of frivolous lawsuits relatively quickly, and to recover attorney’s fees and have sanctions imposed if the court agrees that the suit was brought for improper purposes.

Virginia has what’s called an Anti-SLAPP statute, (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Policy) but its application is extremely narrow and hard to invoke, making Virginia a “law tourism” destination for people looking to bring these kinds of defamation suits. 

Initially, we expanded the scope of the existing law to include immunity for statements made in connection with all official proceedings and added a mandatory award of attorney’s fees and sanctions to deter people from bringing these suits in the first place.

The bill’s first stop after being drafted was in the Civil Law Subcommittee, which I happen to chair. My constituent drove down from Falls Church that morning and had about 10 minutes to testify and explain her particular situation. 

While my fellow legislators were sympathetic, they were concerned with the mandatory award of sanctions, so we made that optional again, advancing the bill with only one NO vote. At full committee, an attorney who frequently worked for those bringing defamation suits surprised us with testimony that he thought the bill, even as trimmed by the subcommittee, went too far. We passed it over his objections on a narrow vote, but when the bill came to the House Floor, where we couldn’t afford to lose any votes, we took out the mandatory attorney’s fees as well. 

So far, things were going just like the cartoon — we went to committee where it was argued and amended, then to the Floor, where it was amended some more, and voted on and passed. The next stop was the State Senate, to start all over again.

Bill had gotten a little thinner than when he started the process, but he was still alive.

In the Senate, I didn’t have the advantage of chairing the committee where the bill would be heard, so I spent a lot of one-on-one time talking with my Senate colleagues. My constituent returned to Richmond to have individual meetings with Senators and their staff, once again sharing her traumatic story with the hope that she could tip the scales.

Some wordsmithing later, the Senate Courts Committee and ultimately the Senate passed the amended version, 39-1. The House accepted the changes and the bill headed to the Governor. 

One Virginia specific twist. While the President can only sign or veto a bill, the Governor can recommend amendments, which he did. His amendment narrowed the scope even further so that it only applies to Title IX processes. 

While it’s not all we were hoping for, our bill makes it clear that someone who is suffering sexual harassment in an academic setting can file a Title IX complaint and feel safe to testify about their experience without living in fear of a 9 figure lawsuit being filed for the purpose of bringing about financial ruin and years of emotional distress. That bill will become law on July 1, 2025.