Louisiana lawmakers approved a bill Friday with no opposition to give legislators who are also attorneys a special privilege to delay court proceedings if they interfere with their statehouse jobs. Senate Bill 9 is a slightly more restrictive version of the legislative continuance law the Louisiana Supreme Court declared unconstitutional last month. It tightens up guidelines for granting legislators-lawyers court extensions for their outside law practices based on a conflict with their elected duties. The bill includes a new process for the legislator’s opposing counsel to appeal a lawmaker’s request for a court continuance on the grounds that it causes an “unnecessary delay” or a “needless increase” in the cost of litigation. A judge could also deny the continuance based on the grounds that it causes “irreparable harm” to the opposing party to delay the proceedings. The period of time during which a legislator would be entitled to an automatic court extension is also shorter in the bill than it was under the defunct law. It would start 21 days before a legislative session convenes instead of 30 days prior. Any granted continuance would also delay court proceedings and deadlines for 45 days after a legislative session ends instead of 60 days. Legislators would also be prohibited from using their privileged delays on court proceedings on time-sensitive issues such as child custody, protective orders and domestic violence cases. The entitlement to a courtroom delay for legislative activity outside of a session or constitutional convention is also weaker in the new legislation. Judges will have more discretion to deny a request for a legislator’s extension over a committee hearing or other legislative work that takes place during the rest of the year. As long as Gov. Jeff Landry doesn’t veto the bill, the new legislative continuance law should take effect some time over the next three weeks. Lawmakers also added a provision at the last minute to make it apply retroactively back to Oct. 25, about two weeks before the recent special session on taxes commenced. The Supreme Court threw out the old legislative continuance statute because justices considered it to be too sweeping. It did not give opposing counsel or judges enough discretion to challenge a lawmaker’s request for a delay in a court case, they said in their ruling. Shortly after overturning the old law, the court also issued its own set of rules to judges on handling legislator-attorney requests for court extensions in a more limited fashion. Legislators used those rules as guidance for crafting the legislation approved last week, said Sen. Greg Miller, R-Norco, sponsor of the bill. The Supreme Court took up the matter of legislative continuances after two plaintiffs attorneys alleged state Sen. Alan Seabaugh and Rep. Michael Melerine, Republicans from Shreveport who share a law practice, were abusing the privilege earlier this year. The lawyers said Seabaugh and Melerine’s legislative extensions had unreasonably delayed resolution of their client’s automobile accident lawsuit over six years. Justices sided with the plaintiffs’ attorneys and described Seabaugh’s unusual delays in the lawsuit as reprehensible. Seabaugh became a state senator at the beginning of this year following 12 years in the Louisiana House of Representatives. Melerine took over Seabaugh’s House seat in January. Seabaugh and Melerine voted for the legislative continuance bill.