I guess it is a good idea not to hold a state liable for crimes committed 80- years ago. That might set a precedent that would make the state liable for something that happened oh say, 140 years ago. But what I don’t understand is how can you not extend the statute of limitations when there is no statute of limitations on murder? What ever happened to our commitment to fighting terrorism?
By: Shaun Schafer, Associated Press TULSA, Okla. -- The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to revive a lawsuit filed by hundreds of people affected by a 1921 race riot that reduced the city's then-thriving black community of Greenwood to ashes. The refusal, which came without comment, left intact the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that it was too late for victims and their descendants to sue the city and the state of Oklahoma. Their attorney had argued that a report issued in 2001 disclosed new information about the riot, and it was not until after the end of the Jim Crow era in the 1960s that courts became receptive to civil rights lawsuits. A federal judge in Tulsa threw out the lawsuit in March 2004, saying he could not find a reason to extend the statute of limitations. "It's still a tragic time in the history of the state," Wellon Poe, assistant attorney general, said of the riot. "I think it is a good decision not to hold the state liable for something that happened more than 80 years ago."
full
<< Home