Yes, the Child Victims Act survived its constitutional challenge. On February 3, 2025, the Supreme Court of Maryland decided Archbishop of Washington v. Doe and upheld the Act's revival of civil claims for childhood sexual abuse that had been time-barred under the old deadlines. The court held that defendants had no vested right to keep those claims closed. Our Child Victims Act guide explains how the law works today.
This article explains what the court was asked, what it decided and why, and what the decision means for survivors whose abuse happened years or decades ago.
What the Child Victims Act did
The Child Victims Act of 2023 took effect on October 1, 2023. Since then there has been no statute of limitations for civil claims based on sexual abuse of a minor, and the change is retroactive, so claims the old deadlines had closed are open again.
Institutions facing revived claims argued that reopening expired claims was unconstitutional. Those challenges reached the Supreme Court of Maryland in three matters it considered together.
The three matters before the court
- A case against the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Washington, which gave the decision its name.
- A case against the Board of Education of Harford County, a public school system.
- A case involving The Key School, a private school, which reached the court as a certified question: a question of Maryland law referred to the court for an answer.
Religious, public and private institutions were all before the court, so the ruling applies across the kinds of organizations survivors most often bring claims against. We do not name the individual survivors involved.
The central question: a statute of limitations or a statute of repose?
The challenge turned on a 2017 provision that the defendants argued was a statute of repose. The difference matters because the two kinds of deadline work differently:
- A statute of limitations sets how long a person has to file a claim. Expiry gives the defendant a defense, but the underlying claim still exists.
- A statute of repose ends the right to sue altogether after a fixed period. The defendants argued that once it ran, they had a vested right never to face the claim, and that the legislature could not take that right away.
The court held that the 2017 provision was an ordinary statute of limitations, not a statute of repose. Because of that, the defendants never acquired a vested right against revival, and the legislature was free to reopen the claims.
Why the court found the Act valid
The court also held that the Act has a real and substantial relationship to a legitimate purpose. That purpose is delayed reporting: survivors of childhood sexual abuse commonly do not disclose it for years or decades, often long after an ordinary deadline would have expired.
The court affirmed the lower-court rulings in the cases on appeal and answered the certified question in the negative, meaning the revival of the claims was not unconstitutional.
What the decision means for survivors
- Revived claims stand. A claim for sexual abuse that happened while the survivor was a minor can be filed now, whatever year the abuse happened.
- Institutions are covered. Claims can be brought against a church or religious order, a school or another organization whose negligence made the abuse possible, not only against the individual.
- Public bodies carry extra rules. Claims against the State and other public bodies carry additional limits and notice requirements under the 2025 amendments, and those requirements have their own timing even though the underlying claim has no deadline.
The decision settled whether old claims can be brought. It did not change what a claim has to prove. Removing the deadline changes when you can file, not what the evidence must show.
What changed after the ruling
The legislature capped damages in the claims the Act revived, and House Bill 1378 (2025, Chapter 104) lowered those caps from June 1, 2025. For revived claims filed on or after that date, noneconomic damages are capped at $700,000 per claimant against a private defendant and $400,000 per claimant against a public entity. Claims filed before June 1, 2025 keep the 2023 caps.
Whether your claim was revived, and which caps apply, is one of the first things we check. Speaking with us is confidential and does not start a case. If you would rather speak to someone who is not a lawyer, the national sexual assault hotline is 800-656-4673, at any hour.
Common questions
Is the Child Victims Act still in effect?
Yes. The Supreme Court of Maryland upheld the revival of claims in February 2025, and the no-deadline rule for abuse of a minor remains in place. The legislature has since amended the Act, as it did with the 2025 damages caps.
Does the decision apply to abuse that happened decades ago?
Yes, if the survivor was a minor at the time. The Act applies to abuse from any year, and the court upheld the revival of claims that the old deadlines had closed.
Does the ruling cover abuse that happened when I was an adult?
No. The Act, and the ruling that upheld it, concern abuse of a minor. Abuse of an adult follows Maryland's ordinary limitation rules, which are far shorter, so ask about timing promptly.
What does it cost to find out whether I have a claim?
Nothing. The conversation is free and confidential. If we take your case, we work on a contingency fee: no fee unless we recover money for you, and we advance the case costs, repaid only from a recovery.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This article is general information about Maryland law, not legal advice about your situation.