BIPA Cases: 7th Circuit Rules Change to Illinois Law’s Damages Provision Retroactively Limits Defendant Exposure

Published
Score
10

Why it matters

On April 1, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled in Clay v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. that Illinois' 2024 amendment to the Biometric Information Privacy Act applies retroactively to pending cases. The amendment, enacted as Public Act 103-0769 and effective August 2, 2024, caps statutory damages at one recovery per person per collection method—a sharp departure from the per-scan damages regime that had exposed defendants to potential billion-dollar liability. Chief Judge Michael Brennan authored the unanimous opinion consolidating three interlocutory appeals, rejecting plaintiffs' arguments for massive per-violation awards that in some cases reached $7.5 million individually or billions in class claims.

The Seventh Circuit classified the amendment as procedural and remedial rather than substantive, turning on whether it altered the underlying right to sue or merely the remedy available. The court applied it retroactively under Illinois law, which generally conforms pending cases to current statutory language absent a substantive change to liability itself. The amendment left Section 15 liability intact—the core prohibition on collecting biometric data without consent—while narrowing Section 20 damages to a single recovery per collection method. Lower courts had split on the amendment's temporal reach before this decision.

The ruling dramatically reduces defendant exposure in hundreds of pending BIPA suits and will likely accelerate settlement negotiations across the docket. Attorneys defending biometric privacy claims should expect the damages cap to apply to all pending cases regardless of when the violation occurred. Plaintiffs' counsel should reassess class action economics and individual claim valuations under the new ceiling. The decision also signals judicial willingness to treat damages limitations as procedural, a distinction that may influence how courts handle similar remedial amendments in other contexts.

mail

Get notified about new Privacy developments

Primary sources. No fluff. Straight to your inbox.

See more entries tagged Privacy.

Also on LawSnap