![Georgia appeals court blocks abuse suit against Atlanta Archdiocese, cites statute of limitations #Catholic A dozen alleged abuse victims suffered a defeat at a Georgia appeals court this week when their lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Atlanta was dismissed on the grounds that the alleged abuse did not fall under an extended statute of limitations. The case turned on whether or not the archdiocese had covered up the alleged clergy sexual abuse, which if true could have “tolled” the time limit for filing abuse claims. “Tolling” occurs when a statute of limitations is extended beyond a normal window, allowing alleged victims to file abuse claims years after they normally would have been barred from doing so. In the Atlanta case, a dozen alleged victims had filed numerous suits against the Archdiocese of Atlanta and numerous churches, claiming that Fathers John Edwards and Jorge Cristancho had abused them over multiple decades from the 1960s to the early 2000s. A lower court had dismissed the cases. The Georgia Court of Appeals on March 9 upheld the dismissal, arguing that the statute of limitations for the filings had expired and that the archdiocese had not committed any malfeasance that could have extended the filing window. The plaintiffs “failed to point to any evidence that the [the archdioceseʼs] actions concealed the Plaintiffs’ claims and prevented or hindered them from filing their lawsuits,” the ruling held. The alleged victims failed to prove that they “ever requested information from the [archdiocese] about their knowledge and involvement in the abuse, or that the [archdiocese] refused” to provide it. The three-judge panel acknowledged that it was “certainly mindful of the grievous circumstances involving heinous conduct which led to the filing of these cases.”Edwards and Cristancho are both listed by the archdiocese as “credibly accused” of sexual abuse. Edwards died in 1997; Cristancho was laicized in 2003. Statutes of limitations have been a key component of disputes in the U.S. Church for years, with lawmakers in recent years advocating and often passing bills retroactively extending the window for filing abuse claims. In 2023 Maryland passed the state Child Victims Act, which abolished a 20-year statute of limitations for civil child abuse suits. The Maryland Supreme Court ruled in 2025 that the law did not violate the state constitution.Numerous states such as New York, North Carolina, New Jersey, Colorado and others have enacted similar laws allowing for abuse victims to seek restitution for alleged incidents that occurred in decades past. Such legal arrangements are not limited to the United States. In January the Spanish Bishops’ Conference and the national government agreed to a compensation plan for abuse victims that will allow victims to file for restitution even if the alleged abuse falls outside of the standard statute of limitations. Georgia appeals court blocks abuse suit against Atlanta Archdiocese, cites statute of limitations #Catholic A dozen alleged abuse victims suffered a defeat at a Georgia appeals court this week when their lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Atlanta was dismissed on the grounds that the alleged abuse did not fall under an extended statute of limitations. The case turned on whether or not the archdiocese had covered up the alleged clergy sexual abuse, which if true could have “tolled” the time limit for filing abuse claims. “Tolling” occurs when a statute of limitations is extended beyond a normal window, allowing alleged victims to file abuse claims years after they normally would have been barred from doing so. In the Atlanta case, a dozen alleged victims had filed numerous suits against the Archdiocese of Atlanta and numerous churches, claiming that Fathers John Edwards and Jorge Cristancho had abused them over multiple decades from the 1960s to the early 2000s. A lower court had dismissed the cases. The Georgia Court of Appeals on March 9 upheld the dismissal, arguing that the statute of limitations for the filings had expired and that the archdiocese had not committed any malfeasance that could have extended the filing window. The plaintiffs “failed to point to any evidence that the [the archdioceseʼs] actions concealed the Plaintiffs’ claims and prevented or hindered them from filing their lawsuits,” the ruling held. The alleged victims failed to prove that they “ever requested information from the [archdiocese] about their knowledge and involvement in the abuse, or that the [archdiocese] refused” to provide it. The three-judge panel acknowledged that it was “certainly mindful of the grievous circumstances involving heinous conduct which led to the filing of these cases.”Edwards and Cristancho are both listed by the archdiocese as “credibly accused” of sexual abuse. Edwards died in 1997; Cristancho was laicized in 2003. Statutes of limitations have been a key component of disputes in the U.S. Church for years, with lawmakers in recent years advocating and often passing bills retroactively extending the window for filing abuse claims. In 2023 Maryland passed the state Child Victims Act, which abolished a 20-year statute of limitations for civil child abuse suits. The Maryland Supreme Court ruled in 2025 that the law did not violate the state constitution.Numerous states such as New York, North Carolina, New Jersey, Colorado and others have enacted similar laws allowing for abuse victims to seek restitution for alleged incidents that occurred in decades past. Such legal arrangements are not limited to the United States. In January the Spanish Bishops’ Conference and the national government agreed to a compensation plan for abuse victims that will allow victims to file for restitution even if the alleged abuse falls outside of the standard statute of limitations.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/georgia-appeals-court-blocks-abuse-suit-against-atlanta-archdiocese-cites-statute-of-limitations-catholic-a-dozen-alleged-abuse-victims-suffered-a-defeat-at-a-georgia-appeals-court-this-week-when-th.jpg)
The statute of limitations could not be extended due to a lack of evidence of fraud by the archdiocese, the court said.

![Georgia appeals court blocks abuse suit against Atlanta Archdiocese, cites statute of limitations #Catholic A dozen alleged abuse victims suffered a defeat at a Georgia appeals court this week when their lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Atlanta was dismissed on the grounds that the alleged abuse did not fall under an extended statute of limitations. The case turned on whether or not the archdiocese had covered up the alleged clergy sexual abuse, which if true could have “tolled” the time limit for filing abuse claims. “Tolling” occurs when a statute of limitations is extended beyond a normal window, allowing alleged victims to file abuse claims years after they normally would have been barred from doing so. In the Atlanta case, a dozen alleged victims had filed numerous suits against the Archdiocese of Atlanta and numerous churches, claiming that Fathers John Edwards and Jorge Cristancho had abused them over multiple decades from the 1960s to the early 2000s. A lower court had dismissed the cases. The Georgia Court of Appeals on March 9 upheld the dismissal, arguing that the statute of limitations for the filings had expired and that the archdiocese had not committed any malfeasance that could have extended the filing window. The plaintiffs “failed to point to any evidence that the [the archdioceseʼs] actions concealed the Plaintiffs’ claims and prevented or hindered them from filing their lawsuits,” the ruling held. The alleged victims failed to prove that they “ever requested information from the [archdiocese] about their knowledge and involvement in the abuse, or that the [archdiocese] refused” to provide it. The three-judge panel acknowledged that it was “certainly mindful of the grievous circumstances involving heinous conduct which led to the filing of these cases.”Edwards and Cristancho are both listed by the archdiocese as “credibly accused” of sexual abuse. Edwards died in 1997; Cristancho was laicized in 2003. Statutes of limitations have been a key component of disputes in the U.S. Church for years, with lawmakers in recent years advocating and often passing bills retroactively extending the window for filing abuse claims. In 2023 Maryland passed the state Child Victims Act, which abolished a 20-year statute of limitations for civil child abuse suits. The Maryland Supreme Court ruled in 2025 that the law did not violate the state constitution.Numerous states such as New York, North Carolina, New Jersey, Colorado and others have enacted similar laws allowing for abuse victims to seek restitution for alleged incidents that occurred in decades past. Such legal arrangements are not limited to the United States. In January the Spanish Bishops’ Conference and the national government agreed to a compensation plan for abuse victims that will allow victims to file for restitution even if the alleged abuse falls outside of the standard statute of limitations. Georgia appeals court blocks abuse suit against Atlanta Archdiocese, cites statute of limitations #Catholic A dozen alleged abuse victims suffered a defeat at a Georgia appeals court this week when their lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Atlanta was dismissed on the grounds that the alleged abuse did not fall under an extended statute of limitations. The case turned on whether or not the archdiocese had covered up the alleged clergy sexual abuse, which if true could have “tolled” the time limit for filing abuse claims. “Tolling” occurs when a statute of limitations is extended beyond a normal window, allowing alleged victims to file abuse claims years after they normally would have been barred from doing so. In the Atlanta case, a dozen alleged victims had filed numerous suits against the Archdiocese of Atlanta and numerous churches, claiming that Fathers John Edwards and Jorge Cristancho had abused them over multiple decades from the 1960s to the early 2000s. A lower court had dismissed the cases. The Georgia Court of Appeals on March 9 upheld the dismissal, arguing that the statute of limitations for the filings had expired and that the archdiocese had not committed any malfeasance that could have extended the filing window. The plaintiffs “failed to point to any evidence that the [the archdioceseʼs] actions concealed the Plaintiffs’ claims and prevented or hindered them from filing their lawsuits,” the ruling held. The alleged victims failed to prove that they “ever requested information from the [archdiocese] about their knowledge and involvement in the abuse, or that the [archdiocese] refused” to provide it. The three-judge panel acknowledged that it was “certainly mindful of the grievous circumstances involving heinous conduct which led to the filing of these cases.”Edwards and Cristancho are both listed by the archdiocese as “credibly accused” of sexual abuse. Edwards died in 1997; Cristancho was laicized in 2003. Statutes of limitations have been a key component of disputes in the U.S. Church for years, with lawmakers in recent years advocating and often passing bills retroactively extending the window for filing abuse claims. In 2023 Maryland passed the state Child Victims Act, which abolished a 20-year statute of limitations for civil child abuse suits. The Maryland Supreme Court ruled in 2025 that the law did not violate the state constitution.Numerous states such as New York, North Carolina, New Jersey, Colorado and others have enacted similar laws allowing for abuse victims to seek restitution for alleged incidents that occurred in decades past. Such legal arrangements are not limited to the United States. In January the Spanish Bishops’ Conference and the national government agreed to a compensation plan for abuse victims that will allow victims to file for restitution even if the alleged abuse falls outside of the standard statute of limitations.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/georgia-appeals-court-blocks-abuse-suit-against-atlanta-archdiocese-cites-statute-of-limitations-catholic-a-dozen-alleged-abuse-victims-suffered-a-defeat-at-a-georgia-appeals-court-this-week-when-th.jpg)
The statute of limitations could not be extended due to a lack of evidence of fraud by the archdiocese, the court said.

![University of Dallas panel explores American exceptionalism through a Catholic lens #Catholic In a standing-room-only event, college students lined the walls of a large room at the University of Dallas to hear three Catholic academics and an apologist reflect on what makes America exceptional in a celebration marking the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States.Liam Ritter, a junior and the founder of the university’s Young Americans for Freedom chapter, which hosted the discussion, told EWTN News that the March 4 panel of speakers served as the capstone of three days of celebrations at the university.The panel was comprised of University President Jonathan Sanford; Trent Horn, staff apologist with Catholic Answers; Burt Folsom, distinguished fellow at Hillsdale College and economic historian; and Susan Hanssen, associate professor of history at the University of Dallas.‘We have a population of people who know what is at stake’In response to Ritter’s question, “Why [is it] that our political regime has been so stable for so long,” Hanssen recalled America’s first immigrants. “I think the first thing that makes America exceptional, and its political regime exceptional, is the fact that America was first populated by people who fled the rise of the modern nation state and totalitarianism … and so we have a population of people who know what is at stake in political liberty," she said.“Theyʼve seen what happened to their ancestors,” she continued. “They remember the stories. And America has been blessed in its political constitution with the regime of liberty, which has made possible the flourishing of subsidiary communities and societies.”Hanssen said we should not take for granted today that we still “have a free people." “We need to listen to our latest immigrants … those who have fled Venezuela, those who have fled Iran, like my uncle, a Persian Jew, who refuses to call himself Iranian because he associates modern Iran with the regime of the Ayatollah.”‘Get married, have children, raise them well’Sanford said that though we are a nation of immigrants, “there won’t be enough to pull in to make up for” the continuing demographic decline.“Get married, have children, raise them well,” he said to chuckles from a receptive audience, which was mostly composed of college students.He encouraged the students not to focus on “one big step,” but rather, to take smaller steps: “Get up early. Pray. Exercise. Go through the day in an ordered fashion, give Caesar what is Caesarʼs, and God what is God’s.”“Do the little things thousands and thousands of times,” he said.“In order to exercise liberty properly,” he continued, one has to ask, "How should I live my life?” and then rely on the institutions that “help you do that.”He called the family the “foundational institution” of America. “Recover the family,” he said.In addition, “we need to see those institutions that mediate the virtues — schools, universities — that embrace fully the idea of what [the virtues] are.”Horn also encouraged students to focus on family relationships, telling them “get off the phones and the internet. They’re killing all of us. They’re rewiring our brains.”
Trent Horn (left), an apologist at Catholic Answers, and University of Dallas President Jonathan Sanford participate in a panel on American exceptionalism at the University of Dallas on March 4, 2026. | Credit: Courtesy of University of Dallas Young Americans for Freedom Chapter
Of people currently in their 20s in America, "one in three will never have children,” he lamented, implying too much technology use is partly to blame.The Catholic Answers apologist pointed out, however, that though the Second Industrial Revolution “broke the family” by encouraging workers to move away from their homes and families to pursue careers, the internet “post-Covid,” in the age of “Zoom and telecommuting … might be good” because many people no longer have to choose between a job and staying near their extended families.“Maybe tech can help build up family networks,” he said.‘The greatest outpouring of economic development’ in historyRitter told EWTN news that he chose speakers who could address “the wonderful things the U.S. has contributed” to the world because “a lot of young people don’t have appropriate gratitude for the country.”Ritter asked Folsom, a historian who focuses on economics and industrial affairs, about what the professor believes the U.S. has contributed to world economics and world innovations.Folsom said that the generation after the Civil War, from 1865 to 1905, was responsible for “the greatest outpouring of economic development … in world history” and “gave us the rise of an America that became a world power” by World War I.He listed inventions that facilitated the rapid development of industry and infrastructure in the country during the Second Industrial Revolution, including the typewriter, the telephone, adding machines, the light bulb, electricity, factory-produced cars, and recording devices for music and movies, among other innovations.Through the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, “the founders gave us the freedom” to develop these technologies, he said. “We had amazing infrastructure that allowed people to produce, and not have government get in their way.”The professor said the post-Civil War period could be eclipsed in the present day “because with artificial intelligence, this generation may yet be able to come up with more.”‘A responsibility for this political regime of freedom’At the conclusion of the panel discussion, Hanssen called the feeling in the room “electric, it’s teeming with patriotism. This isn’t a normal college campus.”Referring to Sanford’s earlier admonition to ”get married and have kids,” she said: “I agree, be fruitful and multiply … Preach the Gospel, and baptize in the name of Jesus, but also, go into politics!” she exclaimed.She encouraged the students to develop “the ability to love something so much that you would die for it: God, family, country.”“Recognize what is at stake. We have a responsibility for this political regime of freedom, to the immigrants who come here … to our children… to preserve the rule of law.”She concluded to loud applause: “So family; yes! Faith; yes, but to the barricades, ladies and gentlemen!"](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/university-of-dallas-panel-explores-american-exceptionalism-through-a-catholic-lens-catholic-in-a-standing-room-only-event-college-students-lined-the-walls-of-a-large-room-at-the-university-of-dalla.jpg)
The speakers encouraged the college students to get married, have children, stay off the internet (unless it enables them to telework and stay near their extended families), and be political.


The longtime activist was a fixture in U.S. politics for decades, including two presidential runs.

![BREAKING: Bishop Rhoades expresses ‘strong opposition’ to professor’s appointment at Notre Dame #Catholic Fort Wayne-South Bend, Indiana, Bishop Kevin Rhoades on Feb. 11 expressed “dismay” and “strong opposition” to the University of Notre Dame’s appointment of a pro-abortion professor to a leadership position at the school, with the bishop urging the university to “make things right” and rescind the appointment. Notre Dame has been at the center of controversy since early January when it named global affairs Professor Susan Ostermann as director of the school’s Liu Institute for Asia and Asian Studies. Ostermann is an outspoken pro-abortion advocate who has regularly criticized the pro-life movement, up to and including linking it to white supremacy and misogyny. The university has come under fire for the appointment, including from Catholic advocates and pro-life students at Notre Dame. Bishop urges school to retract appointmentIn his Feb. 11 statement, Rhoades — whose diocesan territory includes the university — said that since the controversy began he has read many of Ostermann’s pro-abortion op-eds and was moved to “express my dismay and my strong opposition to this appointment,” which he said is “causing scandal to the faithful of our diocese and beyond.”Ostermann’s public support of abortion and her “disparaging and inflammatory” criticism of the pro-life movement “go against a core principle of justice that is central to Notre Dame’s Catholic identity and mission,” the prelate said. The professor’s pro-abortion advocacy and her remarks about pro-life advocates “should disqualify her from an administrative and leadership role at a Catholic university,” Rhoades said.While expressing hope that Ostermann would “explicitly retract” her pro-abortion advocacy and change her mind on abortion, the bishop said that the appointment “understandably creates confusion” regarding Notre Dame’s Catholic mission and identity.Leadership appointments “have [a] profound impact on the integrity of Notre Dame’s public witness as a Catholic university,” Rhoades said.The bishop in issuing the letter cited the apostolic constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae, which directs in part that bishops “have a particular responsibility to promote Catholic universities, and especially to promote and assist in the preservation and strengthening of their Catholic identity.”“I call upon the leadership of Notre Dame to rectify this situation,” Rhoades said. Noting that Ostermann’s appointment is not scheduled to go into effect until July 1, the prelate wrote: “There is still time to make things right.”The university did not immediately respond to a request for comment from EWTN News. Yet the school has defended Ostermann’s appointment since the controversy erupted, telling media that she is “a highly regarded political scientist and legal scholar” who is qualified to lead the Liu Institute. “Those who serve in leadership positions at Notre Dame do so with the clear understanding that their decision-making as leaders must be guided by and consistent with the university’s Catholic mission,” the school said. Among criticism from both within and without the school, at least two scholars have resigned their position at the Asian studies institute in response to the appointment. Robert Gimello, a research professor emeritus of theology who is an expert on Buddhism, told the National Catholic Register that his “continued formal association with a unit of the university led by such a person is, for me, simply unconscionable.”Diane Desierto, a professor of law and of global affairs, also told the Register that she had cut ties with the institute over the appointment. BREAKING: Bishop Rhoades expresses ‘strong opposition’ to professor’s appointment at Notre Dame #Catholic Fort Wayne-South Bend, Indiana, Bishop Kevin Rhoades on Feb. 11 expressed “dismay” and “strong opposition” to the University of Notre Dame’s appointment of a pro-abortion professor to a leadership position at the school, with the bishop urging the university to “make things right” and rescind the appointment. Notre Dame has been at the center of controversy since early January when it named global affairs Professor Susan Ostermann as director of the school’s Liu Institute for Asia and Asian Studies. Ostermann is an outspoken pro-abortion advocate who has regularly criticized the pro-life movement, up to and including linking it to white supremacy and misogyny. The university has come under fire for the appointment, including from Catholic advocates and pro-life students at Notre Dame. Bishop urges school to retract appointmentIn his Feb. 11 statement, Rhoades — whose diocesan territory includes the university — said that since the controversy began he has read many of Ostermann’s pro-abortion op-eds and was moved to “express my dismay and my strong opposition to this appointment,” which he said is “causing scandal to the faithful of our diocese and beyond.”Ostermann’s public support of abortion and her “disparaging and inflammatory” criticism of the pro-life movement “go against a core principle of justice that is central to Notre Dame’s Catholic identity and mission,” the prelate said. The professor’s pro-abortion advocacy and her remarks about pro-life advocates “should disqualify her from an administrative and leadership role at a Catholic university,” Rhoades said.While expressing hope that Ostermann would “explicitly retract” her pro-abortion advocacy and change her mind on abortion, the bishop said that the appointment “understandably creates confusion” regarding Notre Dame’s Catholic mission and identity.Leadership appointments “have [a] profound impact on the integrity of Notre Dame’s public witness as a Catholic university,” Rhoades said.The bishop in issuing the letter cited the apostolic constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae, which directs in part that bishops “have a particular responsibility to promote Catholic universities, and especially to promote and assist in the preservation and strengthening of their Catholic identity.”“I call upon the leadership of Notre Dame to rectify this situation,” Rhoades said. Noting that Ostermann’s appointment is not scheduled to go into effect until July 1, the prelate wrote: “There is still time to make things right.”The university did not immediately respond to a request for comment from EWTN News. Yet the school has defended Ostermann’s appointment since the controversy erupted, telling media that she is “a highly regarded political scientist and legal scholar” who is qualified to lead the Liu Institute. “Those who serve in leadership positions at Notre Dame do so with the clear understanding that their decision-making as leaders must be guided by and consistent with the university’s Catholic mission,” the school said. Among criticism from both within and without the school, at least two scholars have resigned their position at the Asian studies institute in response to the appointment. Robert Gimello, a research professor emeritus of theology who is an expert on Buddhism, told the National Catholic Register that his “continued formal association with a unit of the university led by such a person is, for me, simply unconscionable.”Diane Desierto, a professor of law and of global affairs, also told the Register that she had cut ties with the institute over the appointment.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/breaking-bishop-rhoades-expresses-strong-opposition-to-professors-appointment-at-notre-dame-catholic-fort-wayne-south-bend-indiana-bishop-kevin-rhoades-on-feb-11-expres-scaled.jpg)
Notre Dame has been at the center of controversy since early January when it named global affairs Professor Susan Ostermann as director of the school’s Liu Institute for Asia and Asian Studies.


Archbishop William Lori urged Catholics to approach public life with synodal listening and civic virtue, drawing on Blessed Michael McGivney’s example of serving immigrant families.


Public schools in the United States are required by the U.S. Constitution to allow students and staff to pray, the government said this week.


After the war, Washington’s dedication to the nascent nation did not wane. He presided over the Constitutional Convention in 1787, where his support was crucial in the drafting and ratification of the U.S. Constitution. In 1789, he was unanimously elected as the first President of the United States, serving two terms and setting many precedents for the office. Washington’s presidency established the foundations of American governance, including the creation of a stable financial system, the establishment of the executive cabinet, and the tradition of a peaceful transfer of power. Retiring to his beloved Mount Vernon in 1797, he remained a symbol of national unity until his death on December 14, 1799. Washington’s legacy as a leader of integrity, courage, and vision continues to inspire generations.
Read More