Letters to Veto California Bill SB 577

Background

In 2019, California passed AB 218, which was a window legislation that gave survivors whose opportunity to file a civil lawsuit was over a three year time period to file a claim, regardless of the statute of limitations. What lawmakers did not expect was that the state would end up owing survivors for the decades of abuse they allowed to run rampant in their institutions for decades.

During the 2020-2022 window, thousands of survivors who were abused in public institutions, such as public schools, juvenile detention, and other state-run entities where employees work with children, bravely came forward. Instead of looking into these claims to understand how this happened, the cases were settled for an approximate sum of four billion dollars. This has resulted in an economic and financial crisis. California is to blame for allowing so much abuse. California agreed to these settlements. Yet, it is trying to get out of accountability.

SB 577

Bill SB 577 was introduced as a thinly veiled punishment for survivors, and yet they’re trying to tell us it’s a compromise. Although some of the elements, such as a cap on the dollar amount a public entity could owe to a survivor, have been removed, there are still deeply troubling elements in the bill that is currently sitting on Gavin Newsom’s desk. One of those includes stricter evidentiary standards for survivors over the age of 40, specifically for those survivors who sue public entities. Delayed-disclosure is much more common than coming forward immediately. Currently, the average age of disclosure is approximately 52 years old.

What makes this all even worse? They are positioning this as a compromise, as if they are doing something for survivors and as if accountability for sexual violence should even involve a compromise. All they’ve done is add basic language about protecting survivors that should have been implemented all along.

Why single out survivors who have had to live in silence for longer? What makes the state deserving of more protection and less accountability? Why agree to a settlement, then sound the alarm on an economic crisis? It’s a simple way to justify rolling back survivor rights. It is retaliatory whether or not their main goal is to harm survivors, repeating the all-too-familiar cycle of survivors speaking out, then being punished.

We need your help.

California has historically been a trail-blazing state when it comes to survivor rights. This will be the first time we roll them back. SB 577 is currently sitting on Gavin Newsom’s desk and he has until the end of the day on Wednesday, September 30th to veto the bill and protect us. Unfortunately, reports suggest that the bill will likely pass.

Please join us by emailing Governor Newsom to kindly and respectfully request that he vetoes SB 577. Feel free to write your own letter, or copy/paste the message below and email a PDF to: leg.unit@gov.ca.gov and governor@governor.ca.gov

Dear Governor Newsom,

I respectfully request that you veto SB 577. Survivors are deeply concerned that our rights may be rolled back in California for the first time in history. Putting a higher evidentiary burden for survivors over the age of forty, specifically when they come forward against private entities, is simply unjust.

It unfairly targets the survivors who have struggled in silence for the greatest length of time, provides the state special safeguards from accountability not afforded to anyone else, and raises the already unrealistically high burden of proof for survivors.

California has done such amazing things for survivor rights, and it is without a doubt that vetoing this bill is the only way to maintain that streak. I kindly request that the well-being of survivors be the driving force behind your decision this week, and you decide to veto SB 577.

Respectfully,

[Your Name]