House committee releases bill to eliminate civil statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse

House Bill 75, introduced by Representative Dukes, was released from the House Judiciary Committee after testimony from survivors, advocates and policy experts who said removing the civil statute of limitations would allow long-delayed claims to be heard.

The bill would amend Title 10 of the Delaware Code to remove the time limit that currently bars many civil suits seeking damages for childhood sexual abuse. "This would mean that statute of limitations would never again be a defense for an entity or an individual who caused the sexual abuse of the child," said Marcy Hamilton, founder and CEO of Child USA and a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, during committee testimony.

Supporters told the committee the change restores access to civil courts for survivors who often wait decades to report abuse. "The only way to empower the survivors is to empower them to enter the courthouse and be protected and be able to get discovery," Hamilton said, citing national studies that show many survivors come forward only later in life. Patricia Daley Lewis, CEO of the Beau Biden Foundation for the Protection of Children and a former deputy attorney general in Delaware, told lawmakers the measure would help "find perpetrators and go after organizations and entities that have willfully turned a blind eye to the abuse of children in their care."

Committee members and public commenters recounted personal experience and urged passage. Witness Robin Halas, who described a decades-long effort to hold her abuser accountable, told the committee it took her 50 years to secure an arrest and urged lawmakers to remove the limitation so other survivors can seek justice. Survivor Wendy Mears said she had been targeted and harassed after speaking publicly about abuse and described the bill as essential.

At the hearing, Marsha Lundy, the state's insurance coverage administrator, outlined how the state’s self-insured fund and commercial policies could respond if previously time-barred claims are revived. She told the panel that self-retention levels and coverage timing affect whether the state or an insurer would cover claims and noted that many commercial policies exclude retroactive or prior acts. A fiscal note from the Controller General’s office was described at the hearing as undetermined.

Opponents and some testifying organizations urged caution. Carrie Silverman, an attorney representing the American Tort Reform Association, said eliminating a statute of limitations entirely and applying it retroactively can make civil litigation difficult because records and witnesses for decades-old institutional practices may no longer exist.

The committee voted to release the bill for further consideration. Representative Griffith moved to release the bill; Representative Gorman seconded. On the roll call that followed, committee members recorded the required number of affirmative votes for release. The bill will be listed for signatures and may be reported out to the House calendar if sponsors collect enough signatures.

Why it matters: Proponents say removing the civil time limit will let survivors seek compensation, force institutional accountability and surface information for prevention. Opponents warn of litigation and evidentiary challenges for institutions defending decades-old claims. The committee action sends the measure forward for additional study and potential floor consideration.