Posted on 06/23/2022 6:37:36 PM PDT by marshmallow
The U.S. Supreme Court today denied review in Roman Catholic Bishop of Oakland v. Superior Court of the State of California, (Docket No. 21-1377, certiorari denied 6/21/2022). (Order List.) In the case, 9 dioceses and archdioceses challenged California legislation that extended the limitation period for suits alleging childhood sexual assault to plaintiff’s 40th birthday or 5 years after discovery; created a 3-year window to bring previously time-barred civil actions for childhood sexual assault; and provided for treble damages in cover-up cases. Here is the Supreme Court case page.
Without other details, I would agree with the new law (shocking). The Catholics are clearly covering their rears on this one. I realize there may be a few fakers out there that will claim abuse when there was none but, in my opinion, it’s worth that distraction just to give legitimate plaintiffs every opportunity to file claims that are legitimate.
The ability to file a claim should end at age 19.
If the maximum age to claim is 44, then 25 more years of abuse is possible.
The pedophile is a sick person that probably can’t stop without outside intervention.
The victims can stop the abuse and are in my opinion far more responsible for future abuse than the sick pedophile.
This is not just about sexual abuse. If this can be done for one crime then it is only a matter of time before it applies to all crimes.
Also if the law can be changed Ex Post Facto then no one is safe.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 3:
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
Both federal and state governments are prohibited from enacting ex post facto laws,1
The statute of limitations exists for a reason. Claims get stale: evidence disappears and witnesses die. You can have the best personal injury case in the world… worth $20 million dollars. And you wait until one day after the statute runs and it’s worth exactly $0. With the Boy Scouts of America, a relentless advertising barrage dredged up 85,000 claimants, tens of thousand of whom have little or no evidence to support their claims. Yet every single one of them gets, at a minimum and, if I recall, at least $3500. Why? What are those people entitled to have EXPIRED statutes of limitation resurrected when my hypothetical gravely injured and indisputably entered p.I. claimant does not?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.