by Rob Jenner
Jenner Law, P.C.
Baltimore, Maryland
Last month a dedicated team of lawyers presented oral argument before the Maryland Supreme Court in support of the Maryland Child Victims Act (CVA) of 2023.
The heart of the legal battle concerned the statutory language that existed in the 2017 Child Victims Act, the prevailing statute that pre-dated the 2023 Act. The 2017 CVA set a 20-year time limit for survivors of child sexual abuse to file lawsuits.
After the passage of that Act, the General Assembly learned more information about delayed traumatic memories, repressed memories, and heard testimony about scientific evidence showing the reason that survivors do not come forward earlier in their lives. Much of the evidence presented to the General Assembly came from advocates at ChildUSA, Prof. Kathi Hoke from the University of Maryland, Delegate C.T. Wilson, a survivor himself who sponsored the bill, and literally dozens of individual survivors.
That information was presented in the wake of the blockbuster report of the Maryland Attorney General. That report, based on extensive investigations, detailed a systematic cover-up by church officials, identifying more than 600 victims and hundreds of clergy involved in sexual abuse across the state, thus providing undeniable evidence of the need for legal reforms to address these longstanding injustices.
And change the law it did, as the General Assembly responded to the compelling evidence and the will of the people. It created a new law that eliminated the statute of limitations altogether, providing a safe haven for survivors, not for predators.
“One legislature cannot effectively handcuff a future one,” said Robert Peck to the Maryland Supreme Court, who represents certain survivors suing the Washington diocese.
The institutions challenging the CVA – the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington and the Harford County Board of Education — argued that the 2017 law created a statute of repose, which they claim gives them a vested right to immunity. Essentially, they want the court to believe that after a certain period, they’re entitled to “complete peace,” as appellants’ counsel explained to the Court.
What’s really at stake here is whether powerful institutions that facilitated or covered up abuse should get a pass simply because time has passed. Justice Angela M. Eaves hit the nail on the head when she asked appellant’s counsel, “Is there any good reason to consider the 2017 law a statute of repose?” In other words, does it make sense to protect institutions from being held accountable for enabling child sexual abuse? “There is no state interest in encouraging child sexual abuse,” the lawyers for the survivors argued to the Court.
And that’s exactly what the CVA is about: making things right for survivors who were failed by the system. The law recognizes that many survivors don’t come forward until decades after the abuse occurred, due to the trauma they endured. By removing the time limits, the CVA gives them a long-overdue chance to seek accountability from their abusers and the institutions that protected those abusers.
We are optimistic that the Maryland Supreme Court will recognize the importance of this principle and hold that the CVA is constitutional. Survivors of childhood sexual abuse deserve their day in court, and institutions that enabled these heinous acts must be held accountable. The ruling is expected by August 2025, and for many, it will mark a critical turning point in the fight for justice.