Pennsylvania lawmakers near finish on church scandal bills | TribLIVE.com
Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania lawmakers near finish on church scandal bills

Associated Press
1971079_web1_web-priest-02

HARRISBURG — Pennsylvania’s Legislature moved closer Wednesday night to settling a yearslong battle over lifting criminal and civil statutes for child sexual abuse crimes in a debate growing out of Roman Catholic Church scandals.

The Republican-controlled state Senate voted to dramatically expand statutes of limitation in sexual abuse cases where children as well as young adults are the victims.

Senators also voted to set in motion the multiyear process of seeking to amend the constitution to give now-adult victims of child sexual abuse a new opportunity to sue their abusers and institutions that may have covered it up.

Last year’s landmark grand jury report on the coverup of child sexual abuse in six of Pennsylvania’s eight Roman Catholic dioceses over much of the 20th century breathed life into legislation to respond to the scandals.

The House earlier this year approved the bills’ core elements, and the Senate’s passage sent some elements of the package to Gov. Tom Wolf’s desk.

However, one bill extending statutes of limitation must win House approval one more time after the Senate added several provisions, including adding young adults to legislation that had previously included just children.

In the debate’s flashpoint, the Senate once again blocked efforts to dissolve time limits in state law that bar now-adult victims of child sexual abuse from suing.

It failed on a party-line basis, after years of opposition by Roman Catholic bishops, insurers and the Senate’s leading Republican, President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson. Debate over it has held up a broader response in the Legislature to the church’s scandals.

Republican senators maintained that it would be unconstitutional to undo a statute of limitation to create a retroactive effect. That brought a retort from Sen. Larry Farnese, D-Philadelphia, that Republicans are using constitutionality as an excuse, and care less about the constitution when a favored group wants the law changed.

“The courts are competent enough to make that determination,” Farnese said. “And when it’s struck down, we start over. How many times have we had bills in this place struck down? When the NRA wants a bill, they get it. Who gives a darn about the constitution then? We’ll push that thing right through because they want it.”

The alternative Republicans preferred to changing state law is changing the state constitution.

However, the process of amending the constitution could take several years because it requires passage by both chambers in two consecutive two-year legislative sessions and then affirmation in a statewide voter referendum.

In the wake of last year’s grand jury report, the Philadelphia archdiocese and six Pennsylvania dioceses opened victim compensation funds while the question of giving now-adult victims of childhood sexual abuse a legal “window” to sue remained stuck in the Senate.

Many victims lost that right under Pennsylvania law by the time they turned 20, while victim advocates say the dioceses have deftly used the delay to limit their civil liability. Offers from the diocese’s compensation funds required a victim to give up the right to sue later.

Categories: News | Pennsylvania | Top Stories
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.