*´ºÉ«Ö±²¥

That legal question of whether the state can change law for actions in the past was at the center of arguments Tuesday before the Colorado Supreme Court, which is considering Saupe’s appeal of the lower court ruling.

The court's justices heard arguments from a lawyer representing Saupe as well as Aurora Public Schools, which Saupe sued that opened up a three-year window for people to pursue litigation for sexual abuse they suffered as children dating as far back as 1960.

The law is part of a national effort to make it easier for victims to seek justice later in life after they have had time to come to terms with what happened.

The school district’s lawyer, Stuart Suller, told the justices that recognizing that the constitution places limits on the kinds of laws state lawmakers can pass does not show disrespect to the survivors of childhood sexual abuse.

“The General Assembly can do many things. But what it can’t do is take the legislative priorities of 2022 and transport them back in time onto conduct that occurred during the final year of the Eisenhower administration,� he told the court’s seven justices.

Saupe’s lawyer, Robert Friedman, argued that school districts, as lesser political entities than the state, cannot claim they are protected against retrospective laws the state legislature enacts. In addition, abusers cannot really ever expect to avoid being sued for abuse, he said, because the statute of limitations for sexual abuse of minors has been flexible.

A 1993 allowed victims to bring lawsuits six years after they realized they had been sexually abused, a subjective standard unlike that of the statute of limitations of other crimes, he said.

Saupe, known as Angelica Synovic when she said she was abused at Rangeview High School, said she hoped her case would be able to proceed and that it would help other women who have been abused to also come forward.

“Regardless if the law has come after the crime, the crime is still a crime and has been,� she said.