A mid-sized import business could find itself both suing and being sued under the same law.
Lessons from current antitrust law
California's antitrust law has long imposed a high barrier: to win a lawsuit, the plaintiff must essentially prove that two or more parties colluded to stifle competition — a difficult standard when a single corporation dominates the market without needing anyone's help. At the federal level, the law allows a single party to sue, but supporters of Assembly Bill 1776 argue that federal courts have gradually weakened this tool over many decades. This is precisely the precedent the bill seeks to change: opening the door for individuals and small businesses to sue a single large company directly, without needing to prove collective conspiracy.
New mechanism and who is affected
The bill's author, Aguiar-Curry, presented data to the Senate Judiciary Committee showing that more than 75% of American industries have experienced a wave of mergers since the late 1990s — from healthcare to retail, from agriculture to technology. If the law passes, a small import business competing with a few large distributors, or a shop owner pressured by an exclusive supplier to accept unfavorable terms, will have an additional legal tool to sue on their own rather than waiting for the U.S. Department of Justice or California's Attorney General to act. Conversely, mid-sized Vietnamese-origin businesses — which often occupy an ambiguous position as both potential plaintiffs and potential defendants in supply chains — could themselves become targets of lawsuits from competitors, although the bill's drafters added exemptions for businesses with a maximum of 100 employees and average gross revenue of 10 million USD or more over three years.
Lobbying money and Democratic infighting
What observers find noteworthy is the money flowing behind the debate: groups supporting the bill have contributed at least 106 million USD to California lawmakers since 2000, according to CalMatters' Digital Democracy database. The business community, through the California Chamber of Commerce, put up billboards near the Capitol directly targeting Aguiar-Curry, warning that the bill would open the door for lawyers to abuse litigation to shake down businesses. Even within the Democratic Party itself there is division: State Senator Tom Umberg, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wants to limit the right to sue only to local prosecutors and the Attorney General, not expand it to individuals — leading him to abstain from voting, which counts as a no vote, and fifteen other Democratic senators also abstained when the bill passed the Assembly with a narrow margin.
What to watch going forward
Amidst the debate over California's internal litigation mechanisms, another development at the federal level deserves attention: according to the New York Times, business tax revenue has declined after the Republican Party enacted tax changes last summer, although some economists believe this change may prove justified in the long term. For Vietnamese-origin business owners, especially mid-sized importers and retailers, the critical point to monitor is the final amendment to Assembly Bill 1776 when the Senate Budget Committee reviews it in early August 2026 — particularly whether the 100-employee exemption threshold will remain intact, and whether the right to sue will be narrowed to prosecutors as Umberg proposes.