The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
H.R. 5560·119th Congress·Introduced Sep 23, 2025

Statutes of Limitation for Child Sexual Abuse Reform Act

IntroducedFamiliesMajor
View bill text
Sponsor
Rep. Subramanyam, Suhas [D-VA-10]
Committees
Education and Workforce Committee (primary)
Last action
Sep 23, 2025

Bottom line

The bill aims to remove legal time limits that prevent child sexual abuse victims from seeking justice by offering federal grants to states that reform their statutes of limitations.

What it actually does

This bill amends the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) to incentivize states to eliminate civil and criminal statutes of limitations for child sexual abuse, exploitation, and sex trafficking cases. It also encourages states to adopt laws that revive previously time-barred civil claims for these offenses. The bill authorizes $20 million annually for eight fiscal years (FY2026-2033) in grants to states that achieve these reforms, with higher allocations for states implementing more comprehensive changes.

Proponents argue

Proponents argue that current state statutes of limitations often expire before victims are emotionally or psychologically able to disclose abuse, effectively denying them justice. They contend that eliminating these time limits and reviving old claims is crucial for holding perpetrators accountable, preventing reoffending, and providing victims with the opportunity for remediation, especially given the average age of disclosure is over 52 years old.

Opponents contend

Opponents might argue that reviving old claims could pose significant challenges for defendants in gathering evidence and mounting a defense, potentially leading to wrongful accusations due to faded memories or lost documentation over decades. Concerns could also be raised about the potential for a flood of litigation, overwhelming courts and increasing liability for public and private entities, including schools and religious organizations, that may have been unaware of past abuses.

The bill is concise and straightforward, allowing for a quick and comprehensive understanding of its provisions within a short timeframe.

Section 3(a)

Incentivizing State Statute of Limitations Reform

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision modifies the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) to add a new condition for states to receive federal funds. Specifically, states will be incentivized to eliminate civil and criminal statutes of limitations for child sexual abuse, exploitation, and sex trafficking, and to pass laws that allow previously expired civil claims related to these offenses to be brought forward again.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupState governmentsImpactEncouraged to change laws, potential for federal funding.MechanismAmendment to CAPTA funding criteria.ScaleNational, affecting all states.
GroupChild sexual abuse victimsImpactIncreased opportunity to seek justice, potential for civil claims.MechanismRemoval of time barriers for legal action.ScaleSignificant for victims whose claims were previously time-barred.

Supporters argue

Supporters argue this is a critical step to ensure states prioritize victim access to justice by removing arbitrary time limits that often prevent survivors from coming forward. They believe it aligns federal policy with the severe, long-lasting trauma of child abuse.

Critics contend

Critics might express concerns about federal overreach into state legal systems, arguing that statute of limitations laws are traditionally state prerogatives. They may also worry about the potential for legal instability and increased litigation costs for states and entities within them.

Tradeoffs

Balances the desire for victim justice against concerns about legal precedent, state sovereignty, and the practical challenges of litigating very old cases.

Section 3(b)

Broadening Definition of Child Abuse for SOL Reforms

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This section clarifies the definition of "child sexual abuse and exploitation" specifically for the purpose of the new statute of limitations reforms. It explicitly states that this term includes "an act or a failure to act on the part of a parent, caretaker, or any other person," ensuring that the reforms cover a wide range of potential perpetrators and negligent parties.

Section 4(a), (b)

Federal Grants for State Statute of Limitations Reforms

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide grants to states that successfully implement specific reforms related to statutes of limitations for child sexual abuse. These reforms include eliminating all civil and criminal SOLs for child sex crimes and reviving previously time-barred civil claims, with a minimum 2-year window or until the victim turns 55. The grants are allocated based on the number of reforms a state achieves, with higher funding for more comprehensive changes.

Section 4(c)

Funding for State Statute of Limitations Reform Grants

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision authorizes the appropriation of $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2033 to carry out the grant program established in Section 4. This totals $160,000,000 over eight years, providing the financial backing for the federal incentives offered to states.

Section 5

Technical Correction to Victims of Crime Act

buried in fine printstraightforward

This section makes a minor technical correction to the Victims of Crime Act of 1984. It changes a reference from "section 109" to "section 107" within Section 1404A of that Act. This type of correction typically fixes an outdated or incorrect statutory citation.

FOUND

Amends Section 1404A of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (34 U.S.C. 20103) by striking "section 109" and inserting "section 107".

Section 5

Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for correcting errors in statutory references without drawing undue attention to what is typically an administrative fix.

Case for: Ensures legal accuracy and prevents confusion in statutory interpretation.

Case against: No substantive case against a technical correction.

Estimated impact: Minimal, primarily affecting legal practitioners and agencies referencing the specific section of the Victims of Crime Act.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Buried treasure
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
  • Implementation
  • Political analysis
Ask Ledger AI about this