Policy & Justice
Criminal Statutes of Limitations for Sex Crimes: End Arbitrary Limits
RAINN urges state lawmakers to reform criminal statutes of limitations for serious sex offenses, giving survivors the time they need to heal and come forward.
State criminal justice systems deny justice to survivors of sexual violence by ignoring the reality of the crime and imposing arbitrary limits on their pathways to justice.
More than half of these crimes are never reported to police. (1) Approximately 1 in 5 victims of child sexual abuse never disclose their experiences to anyone, and of those who do disclose, only 10% disclose to legal authorities. (2) In one study of child sexual abuse survivors, over half first disclosed at age 50 or older. (3) When these survivors come forward, arbitrary time limits on justice prevent many from a day in court.
We must do better for the hundreds of adults and children who are assaulted daily, not shield predators and deny victims justice.
Under the current system, archaic statutes of limitations limit victims’ access to justice and the state’s ability to take a sexual predator off the streets. States must reform these laws, ensuring that when survivors are ready to report, the system holds perpetrators accountable.
The Burden of Proof
Lawmakers must balance two critical interests: protecting citizens from sexual violence, and ensuring evidence availability.
Altering a criminal statute of limitations does not change, in any way, the burden of proof required to convict a defendant. Regardless of whether a statute of limitations for a sex crime is five, 10, or 50 years—or never—prosecutors must still provide evidence that proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Even eliminating the statute of limitations still does not eliminate the burden of proof or make it easier to convict someone.
The Need for Reform
Our evolving understanding of sexual violence and its effects underscores the need for criminal statutes of limitations reform. For some, a delayed decision to report is the product of the very real and devastating physical and psychological effects of the crime.
Some estimates indicate that 60-80% of child sexual assault victims wait until adulthood to disclose abuse, often citing lack of trust in the system as the reason for the delay. (4)
We have a responsibility to create a system in which more victims choose to report because they trust the system to do something about it. This will serve states’ overall public safety interests, and support efforts to hold perpetrators of sexual assault, who are often serial criminals, accountable.
As the nation’s largest anti-sexual violence organization, RAINN scrutinized the national landscape of criminal statutes of limitations for sex offenses. We commend states that eliminated the statute of limitations for their most serious sex offenses. In other states that impose arbitrary deadlines, a victim who decides to report later in life, or even a few years after an incident occurs, could be prohibited from pursuing criminal justice.
We cannot hold back prosecutors who are ready and willing to work to achieve justice for more victims and hold perpetrators accountable. States must act now to eliminate or reform their criminal statutes of limitations for serious sex offenses.
Outdated Concerns Uphold an Unjust Status Quo
Outdated arguments in favor of strict, short statutes of limitations fail to reflect updates to technology and research on the impacts of sexual violence. Those include concerns about fading memories or unavailable witnesses.
Modern technology offers new evidence—DNA, cell phone video, audio recordings—and constitutional rules protect against unreliable testimony.
Opponents also cite a fear that change will lead to an opening of the floodgates, inundating courts with new cases. Evidence doesn’t support this.
States that have eliminated or expanded their statutes of limitations have not seen an undue burden on the courts.
States that have eliminated their statutes of limitations or expanded them have not seen an undue burden on the courts.
Prosecutors only pursue cases with sufficient evidence to meet the high burden of proof. Moreover, such a drain on courts is unlikely given the historically low reporting rates for sex offenses. In many situations, the cases brought involve defendants with multiple victims who are finally able to come forward.
Eliminating Time Limitations on Prosecution Is Constitutional
Legislatures set statutes of limitations as deadlines for filing actions. Historically, there was “no general statute of limitations applicable to criminal proceedings.” (5)
The United States Supreme Court observed that statutes of limitations “are by definition arbitrary, and their operation does not discriminate between the just and the unjust claim, or the voidable and unavoidable delay. They have come into the law not through the judicial process but through legislation. They represent a public policy about the privilege to litigate. Their shelter has never been regarded as what is now called a ‘fundamental’ right or what used to be called a ‘natural’ right of the individual.” (6)
Legislatures weigh several factors when setting these arbitrary lines:
- The potential for lost evidence
- An offender’s anxiety versus a survivor’s access to justice
- Delayed disclosure due to trauma
- The ongoing risk a perpetrator poses to the community
Congress reexamined these factors in light of the data surrounding rape and other sexual offenses, and eliminated the statutes of limitations for many federal sexual offenses. (7)
Substantive Protections
Removing the procedural bar of statutes of limitations does not remove substantive protections for a defendant.
- Any criminal prosecution requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Just as a defendant may be concerned with witness memories and lost evidence, the prosecution faces the same hurdles, and those evidentiary issues may serve to defeat the high burden placed upon the state to bring charges.
- The Constitution prohibits new laws that retroactively extend criminal statutes of limitations if those periods have already expired. (8) Any defendant who destroyed evidence of their innocence once the statute of limitations expired could not be prosecuted.
- If statutes of limitations are eliminated, the defendant is still protected under the Fifth Amendment (9) if the delay was deliberate and “it caused him actual prejudice in presenting his defense.” (10)
Because of the protections inherent in the criminal justice system and the Constitution, the benefits of increasing access to justice for survivors of violent crimes outweigh maintaining archaic statutes of limitations.
For Legislators: Example Legislation
RAINN’s policy memos and issue briefs help lawmakers draft bills that promote justice for survivors and hold perpetrators accountable.
Work With Us
We recognize that each state’s code is unique and complicated. RAINN’s policy team can work hand in hand with lawmakers and their staff to tailor these recommendations to each state’s specific needs.
Contact RAINN’s Policy Team
RAINN works with lawmakers across the country to advance bipartisan legislation that prevents sexual violence, improves justice, and holds perpetrators accountable.
NOTES & CITATIONS
(1) Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, https://bjs.ojp.gov/document/cv23.pdf Opens in a new tab
(2) Delayed Dislcosure Child USA 2024 Factsheet, A Comprehensive Report on Delayed Disclosure in Cases of Child Sexual Abuse, Insights, Implications, and Pathways Forward. https://childusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Delayed-Disclosure-2024.pdf Opens in a new tab
(3) Delayed Dislcosure Child USA 2024 Factsheet, A Comprehensive Report on Delayed Disclosure in Cases of Child Sexual Abuse, Insights, Implications, and Pathways Forward, https://childusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Delayed-Disclosure-2024.pdf Opens in a new tab
(4) Alaggia R. (2010). An ecological analysis of child sexual abuse disclosure: considerations for child and adolescent mental health. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry = Journal de l’Academie canadienne de psychiatrie de l’enfant et de l’adolescent, 19(1), 32–39. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2809444/ Opens in a new tab
(5) 1 Chitty, A Practical Treatise On The Criminal Law 160 (1819)
(6) Chase Sec. Corp. v. Donaldson, 325 U.S. 304, 314 (1945)
(7) See United States v. Briggs, 592 U.S. 69, 77, 141 S. Ct. 467, 473, 208 L. Ed. 2d 318 (2020)
(8) Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607, 611 (2003)
(9) The United States Supreme Court has held the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial does not apply before a defendant is “arrested and held to answer” or charges are filed.. United States v. MacDonald, 456 U.S. 1, 6-9 (1982)
(10) United States v. Gouveia, 467 U.S. 180, 192 (1984)
(11) Should Statutes of Limitations Be Abolished, June 19, 2018, Governor Jodi Rell, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/19/magazine/should-statutes-of-limitations-for-rape-be-abolished.html Opens in a new tab
(12) Criminal Victimization, 2023. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://bjs.ojp.gov/document/cv23.pdf Opens in a new tab
(13) Alaggia, R., Collin-Vézina, D., & Lateef, R. (2019). Facilitators and Barriers to Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) Disclosures: A Research Update (2000–2016). Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 20(2), 260-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838017697312 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1524838017697312 Opens in a new tab
(14) Wyoming and South Carolina
(15) K.R.S. 500.050 (Kentucky); Md.Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. § 5-106 (Maryland); N.C.Gen.Stat. § 15-1 (North Carolina); Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-8 (Virginia); W.Va. § 61-11-9 (West Virginia)
(16) Of sexual abuse cases reported to law enforcement, 93% of juvenile victims knew the perpetrator. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Sexual Assault of Young Children as Reported to Law Enforcement (2000)
(17) In 2023, only 36% of rape/sexual assault victims who reported the crime to the police stated that their perpetrator was a stranger. https://ncvs.bjs.ojp.gov/single-year-comparison/crimeType Opens in a new tab
Last updated: July 25, 2026