Gov. Wolf pushes state Senate to support window to sue for sexual abuse survivors |

Gov. Wolf pushes state Senate to support window to sue for sexual abuse survivors

Sean Stipp | Trib Total Media

Gov. Tom Wolf on Tuesday applauded members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives for swiftly passing a bill to create a two-year window for survivors of child sexual abuse previously timed out of court to sue their abusers.

Building on a campaign he launched this month, Wolf challenged the state Senate to now adopt the legislation recommended by a statewide grand jury that found 301 priests abused at least 1,000 children in six Catholic dioceses — including Greensburg and Pittsburgh — over decades and largely escaped legal consequences due to death and the state’s statute of limitations for prosecuting such crimes.

The House amended Senate bill 261 and passed it 173-21, including a temporary, two-year window for past victims who are timed out of the legal system to file civil suits.

The bill also eliminates criminal statutes of limitations in future child sexual abuse cases and gives victims until age 50 to sue perpetrators and those who supervise them.

The bill now is back with the Senate. There are 10 voting days remaining in this session.

“The tireless work of the advocates, Rep. Mark Rozzi, Attorney General Shapiro, the victims who bravely spoke out, and the families of those who have lost loved ones because of these heinous abuses has helped the House to move quickly, demonstrating again that Pennsylvania is at the forefront of states willing to take these issues seriously. I now ask the Senate to take up this legislation and follow suit with passage of this landmark legislation,” Wolf said in a statement.

House members two years ago passed a similar bill following a grand jury’s findings of long-concealed reports of clergy sexual abuse in the Altoona-Johnstown Catholic Diocese. That bill failed to pass in the Senate — where leaders again have expressed skepticism about such legislation, questioning whether it would pass muster under the state constitution.

On Monday, Wolf joined state Attorney General Josh Shapiro, abuse survivors and supporters of the bill to create retroactive window to sue at a rally in Harrisburg.

Although the legislation was prompted by the grand jury report on clergy sexual abuse, advocates said it would benefit all victims of child sexual abuse, many of whom don’t come forward for decades.

Both the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference and the Pennsylvania Insurance Federation have lobbied against any kind of retroactive window for civil suits, citing constitutional and financial concerns.

Citing the likelihood of prolonged litigation and fear of the financial toll such a measure could inflict on the Church, the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference last week recommended that lawmakers reject the window for old claims and instead support a settlement fund for old claims to be underwritten by the dioceses and administered by a neutral third party.

The battle over the bill comes on the eve of a Pennsylvania Supreme Court hearing in Philadelphia where lawyers for a dozen clergy members who objected to the recent grand jury report and had their names redacted argue that grand jury procedures left them with no vehicle to defend their right to reputation under the state constitution.

Shapiro wants the full report outlining the findings of the grand jury’s two-year investigation to be made public.

Deb Erdley is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Deb at 412-320-7996, [email protected] or via Twitter @deberdley_trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.