Two Articles for the Price of One! Pope Francis Undermines Vatican Diplomatic Immunity With USCCB Intervention, and Here Comes RICO: Abuse Victims Launch Class Action Suit Against Vatican, US Bishops

Two very connected stories. Francis has probably destroyed the legal defence the Vatican has used in the past. Am I the only one who thinks that his stupid and dictatorial action discussed in the first article led directly to the lawsuit discussed in the second?

From Breitbart, 15 November: Pope Francis Undermines Vatican Diplomatic Immunity With USCCB Intervention

In ordering the U.S. bishops to abstain from voting on measures aimed at addressing clerical sex abuse, Pope Francis may have inadvertently performed the most consequential and costly act of his papacy.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) intended to vote on two measures responding to the ongoing sex abuse crisis in its annual fall meeting, which concluded in Baltimore on Wednesday.

A last-minute intervention, however, from the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops instructed the USCCB to stand down and to await a meeting of global episcopal conference leadership convoked by Pope Francis for February.

The Vatican’s direct intervention into the bishops’ governance would seem to undermine the Holy See’s prime pillar of legal defense when charged with negligence in dealing with sex abuse, namely, the relative independence of Catholic dioceses from Vatican oversight.

When the 2010 suit O’Bryan vs. the Holy See sought to depose Pope Benedict XVI in a U.S. court, Vatican lawyer Jeffrey Lena employed a tightly reasoned argument before the U.S. district court in Kentucky, which hinged upon demonstrating that the Vatican was not responsible for the U.S. bishops’ policy on protecting children, and nor was it responsible for day-to-day operational policy.

The plaintiffs’ lawyer William McMurray believed that his case had class-action potential, hoping it could also benefit the thousands of victims of child sex abuse across the whole of the United States, seeking enormous sums in damages directly from Rome.

Ordinarily, under the 1976 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, foreign governments have immunity from prosecution in U.S. courts. However, there are nine exceptions to this immunity, one of which is the so-called “tort exception” clause.

Two years before the Kentucky hearing, a federal appeals court had said that the case could proceed under the tort exemption to the 1976 act, if it could be demonstrated that U.S. bishops were following official Vatican policy.

This is what makes the Vatican’s eleventh-hour intervention in Baltimore so potentially momentous. It seems to willing wave aside the carefully crafted legal boundaries that the Vatican has energetically used to defend itself from international prosecution.

The failure of the U.S. bishops to challenge the order from the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops suggests that the bishops are indeed answerable to the Holy See on operational matters dealing with sex abuse policy.

This tacit admission will almost certainly have massive ramifications in future litigation.

Considering the rise in abuse claims facing the Church in the United States, it is difficult to imagine that the Vatican will not see a dramatic increase in legal actions, which could open the Holy See to billions of dollars in claims.

The O’Bryan action was withdrawn in 2011, in part because 243 abuse victims had already reached a direct settlement with the Archdiocese of Louisville and in part because of the precedent of earlier court rulings recognising the Holy See’s immunity from prosecution.

According to research compiled by Bishop-Accountability.org, to date 15 U.S. dioceses have been declared bankrupt following the post-Boston settlements, with post-1980s settlements totaling over $3 billion.

The Vatican’s apparent abandonment of a long-standing principle of legal defense has potentially game-changing consequences for the future.

The direct Vatican intervention in the U.S. bishops’ response to the sex abuse crisis could easily be the most consequential act of Pope Francis’ papacy, which is not precisely the legacy his followers would wish.

From LifeSiteNews: Here Comes RICO: Abuse Victims Launch Class Action Suit Against Vatican, US Bishops

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 16, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – A class action suit has been launched against the Vatican and the American Catholic bishops, citing a federal anti-racketeering law known as RICO.

Six American survivors of child sexual assault filed a civil suit on November 13 against the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and the Holy See. The plaintiffs are Timothy B. Lennon; Mark S. Belenchia; Alfred L. Antonsen, Jr.; Joseph Piscitelli; Shaun A. Docherty; and Mark Crawford. Suing for themselves and fellow victims, they have asked for a trial by jury.

The complainants are suing the Vatican both as a foreign state, as an “unincorporated organization,” and as the “head of an international religious organization.”

The preamble to the case includes an overview of the ongoing sex abuse crisis in the Roman Catholic Church, noting all classes of people who have been mentioned in connection with the scandal.

“This case is about the endemic, systemic, rampant, and pervasive rape and sexual abuse of Plaintiffs and Class Members perpetrated by Roman Catholic Church cardinals, bishops, monsignors, priests, sisters, lay leaders, members of Catholic religious orders, educators, and other of Defendants’ personnel, members, agents, and representatives ... while serving in active ministry—with the knowledge of Defendants,” the complaint reads.

The plaintiffs’ first charge will be depressingly familiar to readers:

“Rather than safeguarding and protecting Plaintiffs and Class Members—who were minor children at the time—Defendants protected the abusive Clergy, took extraordinary measures to conceal their wrongful conduct, moved them from parish to parish, without warning church members or the general public, thereby further facilitating their predatory practices, failed and refused to report the abusive Clergy to law enforcement or other responsible authorities as required by law, and—incredibly—even promoted the abusive Clergy. Defendants’ wrongful acts are ongoing and continuous.”

The document then cites the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

“This also is a RICO case brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68,” the complaint reads.

“Plaintiffs’ Complaint is grounded on multiple violations of the federal mail and wire fraud statutes embodied in the RICO statute prohibiting ‘schemes to defraud’ where the fraud is ‘representational’ or where the fraud amounts to ‘cheating and defrauding’ without representations. This Complaint alleges violations of the federal mail fraud and wire fraud statutes in both ways.”

In an attempt to make the Catholic Church fit the terms of the RICO Act, the complainants describe her as an “Enterprise.”

“The RICO enterprise alleged in this Complaint is the Roman Catholic Church in the United States, an unincorporated association-in-fact,” the documents says and goes on to enumerate every diocese, eparchy, and religious order in the United States, as well as a number of priests.”

The document continues, “Each diocese is headed by a bishop who, in turn, is a member of Defendant USCCB.”

“The RICO Defendants conducting and participating, directly and/or indirectly, in the affairs of the Church Enterprise to injure and harm Plaintiffs and Class Members via the mails and wires are Defendant USCCB and Defendant Holy See,” it claims.

The 84-page document claims that “wrongful conduct” by the Vatican and the USCCB “flagrantly violates...laws of the United States, the common law of the states, federal common law, Catholic Church canon law, and customary international law, including treaties and conventions adopted and signed by Defendant Holy See.”

The lawsuit was filed at U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. by attorneys Mitchell Toups, Richard Coffman, Joe Whatley Jr., and Henry Quillen. According to the Catholic News Agency (CNA), these lawyers have been involved with similar lawsuits on behalf of sexual abuse victims.

As a result of their lawsuit, victims are hoping to win “compensatory damages, economic damages, punitive damages, RICO treble damages, medical monitoring, pre- and post-judgment interest, and attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses, and court costs.”

They are also hoping that their actions will force the Holy See and the USCCB to “comply with various state statutes requiring them to report the abusive Clergy to law enforcement or other responsible authorities, terminate the abusive Clergy, identify the abusive Clergy to the general public so that parents may protect their children going forward, release documents evidencing such Clergy abuse to achieve transparency, and such other relief the Court deems just and proper.”