Protect access to justice and be munificent

The contingency fee system is a necessary democratic tool in American law. It is the reason why injury victims and the families of those wrongfully killed can hold billion-dollar corporations and insurance companies accountable, even when they lack the money to hire lawyers.

This critical system is now under attack by Uber Technologies, and every lawyer who believes in holding wrongdoers accountable and compensating victims should be doing everything within their power to protect it.

Uber is funding a proposed California constitutional amendment, Initiative 25-0022A1, which will appear on the November 2026 ballot. The measure would destroy the contingency fee system for anybody injured or killed while riding on a bicycle or motorcycle, or while riding in a car or other vehicle. It would also reach products liability claims arising out of automobile accidents.

If Initiative 25-0022A1 passes, access to medical care for the most vulnerable will likely disappear, as the new law limits what victims can recover for their medical expenses and burdening taxpayers with paying for harms caused by Uber and other corporate defendants.

The big lie

That Uber's initiative is designed to protect injury victims and ensure they receive more money is one of the biggest lies ever told in American political history. Sadly, however, we live in a time when voters believe such lies, when money and propaganda can buy these false beliefs. The truth is that every piece of Uber's big beautiful bill restricts and harms the people Uber's drivers injure or kill. Whether Uber's fraudulent scheme can be effectively communicated to the voting public depends on the legal community and how much it is willing to invest in the fight.

The Attorney General's official Title and Summary for Initiative 25-0022A1 confirms that Uber and the insurance industry will have an insurmountable litigation advantage if the law passes: The measure would not restrict fee arrangements for defendants' attorneys.

The corporations that caused the harm and the insurance companies that defend them will have no limits on what they spend to deny, delay, and grind down every claim, while injury victims will face a constitutional cap on what their lawyers can be paid for fighting back. One side gets unlimited firepower; the other side's representation is choked off by constitutional rule.

Those who will be harmed the most will be those who have suffered the worst injuries-paraplegia, quadriplegia, amputations, traumatic brain injuries, spinal injuries, chronic regional pain syndrome, severe disfigurements. They will lose access to justice because their representation requires the most work and highest contingency risk of time and litigation costs.

Taxpayers will pay

California's own fiscal analysis confirms the burden that will be inflicted on taxpayers by restricting access to the justice system. According to the Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance, Uber's law will reduce the number of motor vehicle cases filed and will increase Medi-Cal costs.

Trauma centers, public hospitals, and county clinics will be overwhelmed when injured people turn to them for care. Uber and the insurance industry will earn interest on the money they save by not having to pay for those injuries. Rich corporations will pay less, California taxpayers will pay more.

This is not a talking point for lawyers but an objective conclusion and risk assessment by the nonpartisan office that advises lawmakers and the Governor.

The money trail

Uber's efforts to insulate itself from accountability did not begin and will not end in California. In January 2025, the Nevada Supreme Court unanimously rejected an Uber-backed initiative that would have capped contingency fees in civil cases at 20%. Chief Justice Douglas Herndon, writing for the court, held that the petition language was "misleading and confusing." Similar fights are brewing in other states. These coordinated, well-funded, multi-state strategies are being organized nationally.

As of the FPPC's most recent public tally, top contributors had given more than $32 million in support of Uber's initiative. Uber and its allies spent over $200 million on Proposition 22 and won. Uber generated $52 billion in revenue and more than $10 billion in net income in 2025. On its fourth-quarter earnings call, Uber's executives told their investors that reduced insurance costs would boost revenue growth. For Uber and its investors, the planned schemes of buying "insulation from accountability laws" are capital investments with billions and billions in projected returns.

A fair system

Let's be brutally honest and discuss the elephant in the room. Contingency fee practices, for those who succeed, can be extraordinarily lucrative. Taking on the greatest risks and generating large recoveries for deserving clients can result in millions of dollars per year in income. The higher the risk the greater the reward, but when the risk goes south those of us who do this work know that millions in time and costs are often lost. The contingency fee system is a fair system.

If we want to preserve this system, we must do what we expect of any group that has accumulated extraordinary wealth. We tell billionaires they should give back. We tell tech founders and hedge fund managers that their success carries a civic duty. This same principle applies to lawyers who have achieved wealth through working in the contingency fee system. If you have done well, then you owe a debt to the contingency fee system and you must invest in its protection.

Give because it matters

Giving back means more than signing a check once a year at a gala to get recognition. Generosity should be a habit, a reflex, a standing commitment. If someone asks and they are aligned with what you believe, give: whether it's local races, state races, national races, consumer protection campaigns, access-to-justice organizations, legal aid, public interest fellowships or scholarships.

Don't overthink it or run a cost-benefit analysis each time. Don't wait for the perfect cause or the perfect candidate or for others to step up before you do. Give because the work matters and because the people doing it should not have to beg for resources from those whose profession made them wealthy. A candidate who fights for consumers, for tenants, for injured people, for working families should be able to count on the lawyers who represent those same people for a living.

When you adopt the philosophy of munificence, you will end up on every list. Somewhere out there, a third grader running for class president is drafting a fundraising email with your name on it. That happens when we make ourselves available, and the alternative is worse: hoarding what we earn, collecting things that carry no meaning beyond the price tag and leaving the work of protecting the justice system to someone else.

How can a lawyer win a $50 million verdict and then disappear into a lifestyle far removed from the system that provided that opportunity in the first place? Society decided that all injured Americans deserve representation and equal access to justice. Instead of flaunting flashy things and empty civic resumes, lawyers should use their success to give back to society, to ensure that the system that gave them a good living is not killed by the likes of Uber.

A scary world

Imagine a world in which corporations and insurance companies have the power to avoid accountability, in which ordinary people cannot afford a lawyer or access the courts. Companies invest in safety when harming people costs more than preventing harm. Strip away the threat of accountability and the math flips. Corners will be cut, warnings will be ignored, recalls will be delayed and people will die. Costs will shift to families, public health facilities and taxpayers.

The response

What does giving back look like in practice? It means funding organizations on the front lines. Consumer Attorneys of California (CAOC) is leading the opposition to Uber's initiative and has been fighting to preserve access to justice for decades. Consumer Watchdog has been exposing the impact of Uber's measure and sounding the alarm on its autonomous vehicle liability strategy. These organizations need our sustained support, not just during ballot season but year-round. A war chest of $100 million would have stopped Uber in its tracks.

California's legal community could be the most powerful lobbying force in this country if it simply took action. It should support political candidates who defend access to justice at the local, state, and national levels and oppose those who side with corporations and the insurance industry. It should support legal aid organizations, public interest groups and policy reform efforts that keep the system functioning for people who cannot pay by the hour. California law does not cap contributions to ballot measure committees; there is no excuse to sit this one out.

Plaintiffs' lawyers: This fight is yours, whether you want it or not. If you take cases on contingency, your business model is on the ballot. If Uber wins in California, its playbook does not stay in California. The next state on the list could be yours. Today the target is motor vehicle litigation and product liability. Tomorrow it will be all civil liability, employment and civil rights cases. Everyone whose practice has been built on the contingency fee system has a stake in this; every one of us has an obligation to defend it.

Uber's committee reports raising more than $32 million; Prop 22 showed that it will spend whatever it takes to win. We cannot rely on a handful of large donors to carry this fight. The plaintiffs' bar must step up at meaningful levels. If every lawyer who had good contingency cases wrote a real check rather than a token one, the war chest would dwarf Uber's.

Whatever number you pick, pick one that means something to your firm. It's a small price for keeping the system that built your career, much smaller than what it will cost you when the system goes away.

There should be no excuses. If your firm is small, give what you can give and recruit others to give. Local giving matters, but it does not stop a constitutional amendment. If you practice in another state, remember that California is the laboratory. If we lose here, your state is next and you will have done nothing to prevent it. Even if you don't handle automobile cases, read the initiative. The model is auto first because that is the easiest to sell to voters. Once it passes, the same template will be adapted to whatever practice area is next on the list. None of us are exempt, none of us get to opt out.

This is not a choice between giving and not giving. It is a choice between giving now, while we can still win, or giving later to lawyers who will be trying to undo what we let happen. Pick the first one. Set a number that means something to your firm, write it into your annual budget and treat it the way you treat your overhead, because that is exactly what it is.

Conclusion

As successful plaintiff's lawyers, we know what the contingency system makes possible, because it made our careers possible. Both of us started with nothing: no mentors, no money, no cases. One of us had parents who immigrated from Iran with nothing. The other grew up underprivileged, joining the military in order to go to college and law school. The contingency fee system is the reason each of us was able to build a practice, represent people in their worst moments and ultimately be munificent.

The contingency fee system levels the field. It allows the 95% of Americans who could never pay a lawyer by the hour to retain the best trial lawyers, to force the corporations that harmed them to answer for their injuries. Because of contingency fees, dangerous products are recalled, warnings are printed, unsafe vehicles come off the roads and drivers are better trained. Every plaintiff who pursues a claim protects someone who might otherwise have been hurt. 

The contingency fee is not a private remedy for the injured. It is a public good that keeps our country safer. The two of us have contributed almost $6 million to this effort, because we believe in the system. Each of us could easily retire or practice elsewhere, but we choose to be in this fight, to do all we can-because it's the right thing to do.

Fund CAOC. Fund Consumer Watchdog. Fund the candidates who will protect access to justice and oppose the ones who will not. Fund the ballot measures that keep the courthouse doors open. Be Munificent.

Uber is not waiting. Uber is not deliberating. Uber is on the attack. The Red Hot Chili Peppers had a song for moments like this one. Give it away. Give it away now. Match the urgency. Match the spending. The lawyers who built their careers on this system are the only ones who can save it.