Technical corrections only. The changes between v2 and v3 reflect an update in the legislative status from a reported bill to an engrossed act, including the date of passage in the Senate. No substantive policy changes were made to the bill's text.
TREY'S Law
- Sponsor
- Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- May 20, 2026
Bottom line
TREY'S Law voids contractual nondisclosure clauses that suppress information about child sexual abuse, empowering survivors and others to speak out and aiding law enforcement.
What it actually does
This bill, known as TREY'S Law, prohibits the enforcement of nondisclosure clauses in contracts or agreements that prevent victims, alleged victims, or other persons from disclosing facts related to sexual abuse against a minor. It explicitly voids such clauses as against public policy, applying retroactively to existing agreements. The bill aims to ensure survivors and others can report abuse without fear of civil liability, while still allowing confidentiality regarding settlement amounts.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that nondisclosure agreements have historically been used to silence survivors of child sexual abuse, conceal patterns of abuse, and impede justice. They contend that this bill is crucial for protecting vulnerable minors, facilitating the reporting and prosecution of crimes, and upholding fundamental constitutional rights to access courts and petition the government. Proponents emphasize that the bill does not prevent confidentiality regarding financial terms of settlements, only the facts of the abuse itself.
Opponents contend
Potential opponents might argue that the bill interferes with the sanctity of contracts and the ability of parties to reach mutually agreed-upon settlements, including those that offer substantial compensation in exchange for confidentiality. They might raise concerns about potential due process implications for alleged perpetrators if settlement agreements are unilaterally altered, or about the potential for frivolous claims if confidentiality is removed. However, widespread organized opposition to such a bill is less common given the sensitive nature of the issue.
The bill is short and relatively straightforward, allowing for a quick and comprehensive understanding of its core provisions.
Section 1
Short Title
This section establishes the official short title of the Act as the "Terminating Restrictive Enforcement of Youth Settlements Law" or "TREY'S Law." This provides a common and easily recognizable name for the legislation, aiding in public discourse and legal referencing.
Supporters argue
Naming the bill "TREY'S Law" provides a clear, concise, and memorable identifier that helps raise public awareness about the issue of child sexual abuse and the bill's purpose.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against the short title of a bill, as it is primarily a naming convention.
Tradeoffs
None significant for the short title itself.
Section 4(a)
Nondisclosure Clauses Void and Unenforceable
This is the central operative provision of the bill. It declares that any nondisclosure clause in a contract or agreement is void and unenforceable if it prohibits a victim or alleged victim of child sexual abuse from disclosing the abuse or related facts. It also extends this protection to any other person disclosing facts in support of the victim's right to speak. This effectively nullifies confidentiality agreements that silence survivors.
Section 4(b)
Scope of Permissible Confidentiality
This section clarifies that the bill does not broadly prohibit all confidentiality agreements. Specifically, it allows for contracts or agreements that restrict the disclosure of information such as the amount or payment terms of a settlement. The key condition is that such restrictions must not prevent the disclosure of the sexual abuse itself or related facts, as protected under subsection (a).
Section 5(a) and 5(b)
Retroactive Application and Enforcement Prohibition
This section mandates that the Act applies to any nondisclosure clause, regardless of when the contract or agreement was entered into (before, on, or after the date of enactment). It explicitly states that no person may enforce or attempt to enforce a prohibited nondisclosure clause, irrespective of its original signing date. This ensures that existing agreements cannot be used to continue silencing survivors.
Section 5(c)
Preemption and State Law Consistency
This section establishes that the Act supersedes any State law that would permit the enforcement of a nondisclosure clause prohibited by this Act. However, it also clarifies that the Act does not prevent States or localities from enacting their own legislation that is consistent with, or provides greater protection to victims than, this federal law. This sets a federal floor for protection while allowing states to go further.
The bill includes extensive findings detailing its constitutional basis, citing the Interstate Commerce Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause (for enforcing federal criminal law against child sexual abuse and trafficking), and Section 5 of the 14th Amendment (arguing that state enforcement of such nondisclosure clauses constitutes state action violating survivors' due process, equal protection, and First Amendment rights).
Section 2(a)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to establish a strong legal foundation for the bill's provisions, particularly when addressing areas that might touch upon state authority or contractual rights. It's not evasive, but rather foundational.
Case for: Supporters argue these detailed findings are critical for demonstrating Congress's authority to enact this legislation, preempting potential legal challenges based on federalism or contractual rights. They underscore the national importance of protecting minors and enforcing federal criminal law.
Case against: Critics might argue that some of the constitutional interpretations are expansive or could set precedents for federal intervention in areas traditionally governed by state contract law. However, the specific context of child sexual abuse and obstruction of justice strengthens the federal case.
Estimated impact: Provides the legal bedrock for the entire Act, influencing its judicial interpretation and resilience against constitutional challenges.
The definition of "sexual abuse against a minor person" is comprehensive, including offenses under Chapter 110 of Title 18, U.S. Code (Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children), sex trafficking under Section 1591 of Title 18, and "any sexual act or sexual contact involving a minor person that constitutes a criminal offense under Federal law or the law of the State in which the act or contact occurs."
Section 3(3)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to define terms precisely. The comprehensive nature is intentional to ensure broad coverage.
Case for: Supporters argue that a broad definition is essential to ensure that all forms of child sexual abuse, whether prosecuted federally or at the state level, are covered by the protections of TREY'S Law, leaving no loopholes for perpetrators or institutions to exploit.
Case against: Some might argue that such a broad definition could lead to ambiguity or overreach in certain edge cases, potentially impacting agreements not directly related to severe criminal abuse. However, the explicit reference to criminal offenses mitigates this.
Estimated impact: Significantly expands the scope of nondisclosure clauses that become void, ensuring comprehensive protection for minors across various legal contexts.