Council gearing up to nix Mayor Adams’ Christmas Eve veto of sex abuse victims bill

Outgoing Mayor Eric Adams made a controversial decision on Christmas Eve by vetoing a bill that would have allowed sexual abuse victims to sue alleged perpetrators and facilitating institutions, including Jeffrey Epstein’s estate. The bill, known as the “Gender Motivated Violence Act,” was unanimously passed by the City Council last month and aimed to create an 18-month window for victims to file lawsuits, even if the statute of limitations had expired.

Mayor Adams justified his veto by claiming that the bill would essentially provide a $300 million “debit card” to law firm Levy Konigsberg, which represents a significant number of sexual abuse victims. However, incoming Speaker Julie Menin expressed her commitment to overriding the veto in the new year, stating that the bill is crucial for survivors to seek justice for the heinous acts committed against them.

The next City Council will have the opportunity to override the veto within 30 days after their first official meeting in January. Queens Councilwoman Selvena Brooks-Powers, the bill’s author, emphasized the importance of passing the legislation to ensure accountability for survivors of sexual and gender-motivated violence.

The bill is seen as a technical fix for previous legislation that was struck down by a judge, preventing lawsuits against culpable institutions. It would enable numerous suits from victims, including those abused at Spofford Detention Center and by Dr. Ricardo Cruciani at Mt. Sinai Hospital systems.

While Mayor Adams cited concerns about the bill’s potential impact on the city’s budget, advocates and lawyers representing abuse victims criticized his veto as a denial of survivors’ legal rights. Attorney Jerome Block from Levy Konigsberg LLP condemned the mayor’s decision as callous and aimed at depriving survivors of their legal rights.

Despite the mayor’s veto, there is confidence among advocates that the City Council will ultimately override the decision to ensure justice for sexual abuse victims. The veto has sparked outrage among victims, advocates, and legal representatives, who view it as a setback in the fight against sexual abuse and a missed opportunity to hold perpetrators accountable.