Harvey Weinstein's conviction in NY was overturned. It could lead to a new state law.

A wave of sexual assault allegations against movie producer Harvey Weinstein gave rise to an international reckoning for harassment and abuse in the workplace. Now, Weinstein’s recently overturned New York conviction could make way for a new state law.

The state Court of Appeals’ controversial decision to overturn the 2020 rape conviction and grant the disgraced Hollywood mogul a new trial is giving new life to a bill in Albany that would allow judges to admit evidence of a defendants’ past sexual crimes at trial, even if those crimes are not directly related to the case at hand.

The bill’s supporters — who include sexual assault survivors — are hoping they can pass the measure quickly, both to correct what they see as an injustice against survivors of sexual assault and to ensure it’s done before the Legislature ends its annual session on June 6.

But it may not be that easy.

The bill is facing stiff opposition from defense attorneys who say it would treat criminal defendants unfairly and infringe on their rights — particularly those who come from limited means. There are also some early signs of wariness, and perhaps even dissent, among Democrats who dominate the state Legislature and have made reforming the criminal justice system a hallmark of their tenure.

“I expect obstacles,” said Assemblymember Amy Paulin (D-Scarsdale), who initially introduced the bill in 2022 after Weinstein’s lawyers first raised the issue on appeal. “Bills that support women are not always the easiest bills to get done. There's a group of people — most often men, but also sometimes women — who do not support women. But eventually we get them done.”

The Court of Appeals struck down Weinstein’s conviction in part because the trial court allowed testimony from three women whose accusations were not included in his indictment. Paulin’s bill would change the state’s criminal procedure law to explicitly give judges in sex crime cases the power to admit evidence of a defendant’s past sexual offenses.

That evidence could be used for any “relevant” matter, including to prove the defendant “had a propensity to engage in similar wrongful acts,” according to the legislation. A judge would still have the power to block the evidence if it would “create undue prejudice to the defendant.”

But defense attorneys are warning that the bill could have unintended consequences. The Legal Aid Society called the legislation “overly broad” and said in a statement that it “would destroy a fundamental protection against wrongful convictions and unjust incarceration.”

Kathryn Miller, co-director of the Criminal Defense Clinic at Cardozo Law, said New York already has measures in place to allow evidence that’s not directly related to a defendant’s charges in criminal trials, if it meets certain requirements. Making it even easier to present that information would expose defendants to unfair bias from jurors, she said.

“That's what the rules of evidence are supposed to gatekeep,” Miller said.

Miller said she’s also concerned that lawmakers are drafting legislation based on a case that hardly resembles most sex crime proceedings.

“Extreme cases make bad policy,” she said. “When you legislate around something that is an extremely unlikely case scenario, you sometimes don’t think about the typical scenario.”

The bill got a significant boost last week when state Sen. Michael Gianaris (D-Queens) — the Senate’s deputy majority leader — signed on as a lead sponsor. But not all Democrats are on board. Sen. Jabari Brisport (D-Brooklyn) voted against it in committee on Thursday, though he declined to explain his reasoning. Gov. Kathy Hochul, meanwhile, told reporters last week that she’s working with her legal team to determine what type of change to the current law would hold up in the courts.

Taralê Wulff, one of the women who testified at Weinstein’s 2020 trial, remembers waking up to a flood of consoling messages the morning of the Court of Appeals decision. She froze in place as she tried to absorb the news, she said. Then she let out a bellowing cry.

“I didn’t prepare myself for the reality of what happened,” she said in an interview.

Wulff said she testified to support other women who had experienced similar abuse by Weinstein. The court’s decision undermined her belief that survivors’ voices are stronger together, as a collective. She hopes lawmakers will pass the legislation — not only to bolster a future trial against Weinstein, but also to support survivors in cases that garner less attention.

“This is a silver lining because now this bill has a very strong leg to stand on,” she said.

Rachel Marshall, director of the Institute for Innovation in Prosecution at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said sexual assault cases are notoriously difficult to prove because the alleged abuse typically occurs in private with no other witnesses. Jurors can also be swayed by what she called the “myth of the perfect victim” — the idea that sexual assault survivors must scream, fight back, immediately report to the police and cut their abuser out of their life.

“We know that that's just so different from the reality of what most sexual assault survivors experience,” she said. “This law is designed to recognize that reality.”

Marshall noted that 16 other states and the federal system have already adopted the same evidence standards for sexual assault cases proposed in New York’s legislation.

“What we’re seeing in other states that do have these laws is not that we're seeing the floodgates opening and everyone who accuses someone of sexual assault secures a conviction,” she said.

In a statement, Emily Tuttle, a spokesperson for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, said the prosecutor’s office is “working to ensure our laws reflect the reality of sexual assault, while protecting the rights of the accused.”

Modernizing New York’s laws related to evidence of past sexual assaults would allow prosecutors to “better secure justice for survivors,” she said.

Weinstein’s publicist, Juda Engelmayer, said the proposal would “inevitably be detrimental” for others accused of sexual assault.

“Finding a way to make the law work better and be more equitable for all is always a good thing, but it must not be haphazard or designed quickly to fit a specific need in time or to target a specific individual, as this seems to do,” he said in an emailed statement.

But Paulin, the bill’s sponsor, said she’s committed to winning over colleagues who are on the fence.

“There's something wrong with New York if a known rapist like Harvey Weinstein is let out because we don't have updated laws,” she said. “That's what's happening here.”