HB 1044: Torts; deprivation of constitutional rights of state citizens by civil immigration enforcement officers; provide remedies

Currently, Georgia law does not have a specific state-level civil claim aimed at civil immigration enforcement officers who violate someone's constitutional rights. This bill would add a new Code section (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-58) to Georgia's tort law letting any state resident, other than a government officer or employee, sue a person who knowingly violates the U.S. Constitution or the Georgia Constitution while participating in civil immigration enforcement. The bill spells out available remedies, including money damages, injunctions (court orders stopping certain conduct), and declaratory relief (a court statement of legal rights), regardless of whether other laws also cover the conduct. It lists factors a court must weigh when deciding how reprehensible a defendant's conduct was for purposes of punitive damages, such as wearing a facial covering, failing to identify as an officer, not using a required body camera, using an unmarked vehicle, or using crowd control equipment. Winning plaintiffs would be entitled to attorney's fees and litigation costs.

• Creates a new civil lawsuit that Georgia residents can bring against people who knowingly violate their constitutional rights while doing civil immigration enforcement.
• Excludes government officers and employees from being able to bring this particular lawsuit.
• Allows courts to award money damages, injunctions, and declaratory relief without regard to other available legal claims.
• Directs courts to consider specific aggravating factors, like wearing a mask or failing to identify as law enforcement, when deciding punitive damages.
• Requires courts to award attorney's fees and litigation costs to plaintiffs who win or achieve a favorable settlement or change in the other side's position.

The bill affects people who conduct civil immigration enforcement, including law enforcement officers who may face lawsuits, and Georgia residents who could sue them for constitutional violations. It also affects courts, which would handle these new claims and decide fee awards.

If enacted, Georgians who believe their constitutional rights were violated during civil immigration enforcement would gain a specific state legal avenue to sue, including the possibility of recovering attorney's fees. Officers involved in such enforcement could face added legal exposure, particularly if they wore facial coverings, failed to identify themselves, or lacked required body camera footage.

• Section 1 adds new Code section 51-1-58 to Chapter 1 of Title 51, defining terms including 'crowd control equipment,' 'facial covering,' and 'prevailing party.'
• Subsection (b) creates the right for any state resident, other than a government officer or employee, to sue anyone who knowingly violates constitutional rights while engaged in civil immigration enforcement.
• Subsection (c) makes all common law remedies (money damages, injunctions, declarations) available under this new claim and lists six factors courts must weigh for punitive damages, such as wearing a mask, failing to identify as an officer, lacking a required body camera, using an unmarked vehicle, or using crowd control equipment.
• Subsection (d) requires courts to award reasonable attorney's fees and litigation costs to plaintiffs who prevail, considering how much of the relief sought was actually obtained.
• Section 2 repeals any conflicting laws.

1. 2026-01-29House Second Readers (Cámara de Representantes)
2. 2026-01-28House First Readers (Cámara de Representantes)
3. 2026-01-27House Hopper (Cámara de Representantes)

• Shea Roberts (D, HD-052)Patrocinador principal
• Samuel Park (D, HD-107)
• Omari Crawford (D, HD-089)
• Tanya Miller (D, HD-062)
• Stacey Evans (D, HD-057)
• Eric Bell (D, HD-075)

• immigration enforcement
• civil rights lawsuits
• constitutional rights
• police accountability
• tort law