Connecticut's Time's Up Act: What the Law Says and Why Advocates Want More

Reviewed by Survivor Rights Center · Updated 2026-06-25

What Connecticut's current law allows

Connecticut's Time's Up Act, enacted in the wake of the #MeToo movement, created a tiered system for civil statute of limitations in sexual abuse cases. For abuse that occurred on or after October 1, 2019, survivors may file civil claims until they reach age 51. For abuse that occurred before that date, the deadline is age 48. No provision in current Connecticut law creates a lookback window for claims whose deadlines have already expired.

The law was a significant improvement over prior Connecticut deadlines and moved the state in line with a national trend toward extending civil limitations periods for sexual abuse survivors. Advocates acknowledge this progress while arguing that the current ages still leave many survivors without access to the courts.

Why advocates say the current deadlines are insufficient

The central argument from Connecticut survivor advocacy organizations is grounded in the research on trauma and disclosure. Studies cited by advocates indicate that survivors come forward at an average age of approximately 52, a figure that already exceeds Connecticut's current age-51 deadline for even the most recent category of abuse. For survivors of pre-2019 abuse, the age-48 deadline falls even further below the average disclosure age.

Advocates further argue that trauma can suppress memory and disclosure for decades, that institutional pressure often compounds that suppression, and that advances in investigative methods mean older claims can still be meaningfully pursued. These arguments collectively support the case for a lookback window and for removing deadlines entirely for future filings.

What advocates are requesting from the legislature

The current advocacy push in Connecticut has two components. First, a three-year civil lookback window that would temporarily allow survivors to file claims whose deadlines have already passed. Second, a permanent elimination of civil time limits for new sexual abuse claims going forward, so that future survivors are not subject to any statutory deadline.

Despite more than two decades of advocacy efforts, no bill proposing these changes was introduced in Connecticut's current legislative session. The effort has historically faced opposition from defense attorneys, insurers, and religious institutions, a coalition similar to the opposition seen in other states that have eventually passed reform legislation.

How Connecticut compares with other states

Connecticut's current age-51 deadline is more protective than laws in some states but less protective than many others. States that have entirely eliminated civil statutes of limitations for childhood sexual abuse include Maryland and New Jersey, among others. Several states, including California and Rhode Island, have recently opened temporary lookback windows. Connecticut's Time's Up Act occupies a middle position in the national landscape.

The practical implication for Connecticut survivors is that the law of another state may apply in some circumstances, particularly if abuse occurred in or involved institutions connected to states with more permissive rules. Whether that applies to any specific situation is a question for a licensed attorney.

Five Reasons Connecticut Advocates Say the Current Law Falls Short

Survivor advocacy organizations in Connecticut have advanced several specific arguments for why the existing Time's Up Act deadlines are insufficient. Here are the five core reasons, explained in plain language.

1. The average disclosure age exceeds the legal deadline: Research cited by advocates indicates survivors come forward at an average age of approximately 52. The current age-51 deadline for the most recent abuse category already sits below that average.
2. Trauma affects memory and disclosure in ways statutes do not account for: Trauma can suppress memory, alter how events are processed, and create lasting fear of coming forward. These effects can persist for decades and are not reflected in fixed age-based deadlines.
3. Institutional pressure further delays disclosure: Many survivors were actively discouraged from reporting by institutions that caused or enabled their harm. That suppression is a separate form of harm that extended the period before many could come forward.
4. Evidence does not automatically become stale with time: Advances in forensic technology and investigative practice mean that claims made years after the fact can still be meaningfully investigated. Age of a claim does not, by itself, determine whether it can be proven.
5. Other states have moved further: States including Maryland, New Jersey, California, and Rhode Island have eliminated deadlines or opened windows. Connecticut's current law, while an improvement, lags behind the direction of national reform.

Frequently asked questions

Related