BOSTON (MA)
WBUR [Boston MA]
October 5, 2026
By Gintautas Dumcius
Thanks for reading Mass. Politics, where we try to go behind the oft-closed doors of the State House. In this edition: Andrea Campbell, Aaron Michlewitz and more
After the latest clergy sex abuse report, what stands in the way of reform on Beacon Hill?
After releasing a damning report last week on a yearslong investigation into sex abuse at three Catholic dioceses in Massachusetts, Attorney General Andrea Campbell called for lawmakers to take specific actions. Her office recommended ending the statute of limitations for civil child sexual abuse claims and eliminating the $20,000 cap on how much nonprofit charities like the dioceses can be forced to pay in damages.
Advocates say both the cap and the current statute make it hard to sue and seek justice in child sex abuse cases, particularly since victims often don’t come forward until they’re much older. Many of the cases in Campbell’s report can’t be prosecuted because of the statute, according to the advocates.
The statute of limitations, last changed by state lawmakers in 2014, allows civil claims to be brought forward until a victim’s 53rd birthday. The change focused on accusations against abusers rather than institutions, according to victims’ advocates. (Previously, the limit was when they turned 21.)
State lawmakers are already weighing proposals similar to what Campbell suggested, after getting them close to the finish line in a past legislative session. Earlier this year, while Massachusetts House lawmakers worked on a bill focused on the state’s primary care sector — touching on spending targets for providers and insurers as well as support for community health centers — they also tossed in several provisions on child sex abuse statute of limitations.
Negotiations between the House and Senate remain active. Unlike Campbell’s recommendation, the House proposal would create a two-year window that would allow previously barred civil child sex abuse claims to be filed. Campbell’s guidance did not set a time limit on such claims.
The attorney general’s investigation found more than 270 clergy members in the Catholic dioceses of Worcester, Springfield and Fall River abused nearly 1,000 children over several decades, beginning in the 1950s.
State Rep. Aaron Michlewitz, one of the negotiators, called Campbell’s report “shocking” and “heartbreaking.” But he declined to speculate if it will spur lawmakers to include the child sex abuse provisions in the compromise bill. (They have until Jan. 5 to come up with a final bill.)
Lobbyists representing the Massachusetts Catholic Conference, which works with the bishops of the four Roman Catholic Dioceses in Massachusetts, have sought to block similar proposals in previous legislative cycles, according to publicly available filings. (The organization did not respond to a request for comment Friday.)
But the Catholic Church’s influence on Beacon Hill has significantly shriveled. Over the last 20 years, it has repeatedly lost battles over abortion and gay marriage legislation. Its reputation was battered in the wake of the Boston clergy sex abuse scandals and court cases that made headlines in the Boston Globe and the now-defunct alternative newspaper, the Phoenix, in the early 2000s. The Globe’s coverage would become the subject of the 2015 Hollywood movie “Spotlight.”
But there is another influential opponent. The Massachusetts Insurance Federation, a trade organization that includes several major insurers, is also against eliminating the statute of limitations.
Christopher Stark, the trade group’s executive director, said he is not defending the Catholic Church against the allegations. “I have nothing but the utmost respect for the victims coming forward,” he said.
But he called it “unworkable” to retroactively lift the statute of limitations because entities, and by extension their insurers, that face legal action may not be able to access information they may need to mount a defense.
“After a certain number of years, records retainment policies are difficult,” he said, noting that some companies toss documents as the years go by.
Ending the statute of limitations and applying the change retroactively could “send shock signals” to the insurance market, he added, and lead to costly settlements and fiscal impacts for cities and towns. He pointed to the Los Angeles County government in 2025 entering into a settlement totaling $4 billion for thousands of people who said they were abused decades earlier inside county-run detention facilities and foster homes.
Kathryn Robb, a victim advocate and attorney, dismissed the insurance industry’s concerns.
“We hear so many ‘sky is falling’ arguments about this,” she said. “Look, plaintiffs have to prove their case [in court]. … The safety of children has to come first. If institutions haven’t looked the other way, they have nothing to worry about.”
Do you think this is the year lawmakers get an agreement on lifting the statute of limitations? Let me know: gind@bu.edu.
Editor’s Note: This is an excerpt from WBUR’s politics newsletter, Mass. Politics. If you like what you read and want it in your inbox, sign up here.