Hard to know all the details from this article, but it seems like they are raising the bar for civil suits as a result of an action with a firearm to the same level as a criminal action. Basically changing the standard from being a preponderance of evidence to beyond reasonable doubt.
https://thedefenders.net/blogs/preponderance-of-evidence/

So essentially, if you’re found not-guilty after using a firearm in a self-defense situation, then you are also shielded from a civil action for that event.

This is probably in response to “robber sues homeowner after being injured while breaking into a house” stories that float around occasionally.

Heck, I could be way off base here, but that’s how I read it.