Key Maryland Senate committee OKs Child Victims Act, survivors ‘vindicated’

When the yes votes started coming in, David Lorenz could not help but break down and sob. Friday morning marked the most significant victory to date for victims of childhood sexual abuse in Maryland.

“I’ve been doing this, trying to get this bill passed for over 15 years,” Lorenz, the Maryland chapter director of the Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests, told reporters.

The Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee voted 10-1 Friday to pass the Child Victims Act, a law that would make it easier for victims of childhood sexual abuse to file lawsuits against their abusers and the institutions that protected them.

The bill, long championed by Democratic Del. C.T. Wilson, Lorenz and fellow abuse survivors, had passed the House but stalled in the Senate’s Judicial Proceedings Committee the three previous times it was introduced. The bill would remove the civil statute of limitations for lawsuits and create a retroactive lookback window allowing abuse victims to file lawsuits regardless of when their abuse occurred.

With a favorable committee report, Senate Bill 686 will head to the full Senate for a second reading. House Bill 1, which is Wilson’s version of the bill and cross-filed with the Senate version, is awaiting a committee vote. It is expected to pass, as it has on three other occasions.

Senate Judicial Proceedings Chairman Will Smith, a Montgomery County Democrat, sponsored the Senate’s version, having publicly pledged his support for the bill in December.

The Maryland Catholic Conference, the lobbying arm for the Catholic Church’s three dioceses operating in the state, has opposed this bill every year, claiming it is unconstitutional to open a lookback window under Maryland law. Attorney General Anthony Brown disagrees, and in a letter to Smith, said his office does not find the Child Victims Act “clearly unconstitutional” and that Brown is comfortable defending it in court.

Sen. Chris West, a Republican who represents Baltimore and Carroll counties and the lone dissenting committee vote, said he could not support a law he believes is clearly unconstitutional.

“I’m absolutely convinced that this bill is unconstitutional, and will be so held by the Maryland Supreme Court,” West said.

One amendment to the bill, proposed by Smith, would allow the Maryland Supreme Court to decide whether the bill is constitutional before potential lawsuits are litigated in a lower court.

“This will streamline the process and we’ll get an answer on the constitutional issue immediately,” Smith said. “I think it’s a good addition.”

Kathleen Hoke, a law professor at the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, has worked alongside survivors to examine whether the bill would be constitutional, having testified repeatedly before the House of Delegates and Senate. Smith’s amendment, Hoke said, will ultimately benefit both survivors and possible defendants, because they won’t have to wait on the judicial system to work through cases before deciding whether the claims are legal in the first place.

“I’ve never said I think 100% this is constitutional, but I have said people who think 100% it is not constitutional are wrong,” Hoke said.

The bill sets differing limits on the size of monetary judgments against private institutions and public ones. Private institutions, such as the Catholic Church, would be subject to $1.5 million maximum penalty per incident for “non-economic” damages, such as emotional hardship or other pain and suffering. There is no limit for non-economic damages, like medical care or counseling, in judgments against a private institution.

Possible judgments against public entities like municipalities or school boards are capped at $890,000 because of Maryland laws that limit the exposure public bodies face in civil suits.

In a statement, Catholic conference spokeswoman Susan Gibbs said the Child Victims Act provides “false hope” to victims because it is the church’s belief that the law would be found unconstitutional. The conference also takes issue with the different caps for public and private institutions.

“The legislation creates blatant disparity in its treatment of victims, with much lower monetary judgments available to victims of abuse in public institutions than those of abuse in private settings,” Gibbs said.

Survivors and advocates have lobbied for the bill in Annapolis for years, and their reaction was palpable.

Jean Wehner, a survivor of vicious sexual abuse by two priests while she was a student at Archbishop Keough High School in the late 1960s, said Friday’s vote allowed her to feel hopeful, something she does not normally do.

Lorenz, who is not eligible to file a lawsuit because his abuse happened in Kentucky, said Friday’s vote represented validation for those abused in Maryland.

“We’re not expecting that people are going to walk in and just be able to say they were abused and expect to get any kind of settlement. They still have to show their case,” Lorenz said. “And we’re good with it, we only want a chance at justice.”

Kurt Rupprecht, a survivor of clergy abuse from the Eastern Shore, has met regularly with lawmakers during the 2023 session, urging them to make a moral choice and support the bill. He said Friday morning he felt “vindicated” and finally proud of his home state.

However, Rupprecht expressed some caution, saying it still had to pass the rest of the legislature.

“There are more votes to come and survivors are always fearful of more disappointment,” he said.

Wehner said she felt a combination of shock, thrill, amazement and gratitude. But she too, preached caution.

“After all these years, I feel like I’m getting a little drink of fresh water from an institution that has really done nothing to support me or other survivors,” she said.

Public pressure has mounted for lawmakers to take action in the wake of a report by Office of the Maryland Attorney General into abuse and its cover-up in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore going back eight decades. That report could be released as soon as Monday.

Senate President Bill Ferguson, a Baltimore Democrat, said earlier in the session he believed the bill would progress. Gov. Wes Moore, also a Democrat, supports the bill, with his office telling The Baltimore Sun last week that Moore looked forward to signing it into law.