Overview
“Trey’s Law” is emerging as part of a broader legislative push to limit or invalidate confidentiality provisions in settlements involving child sexual abuse claims. With laws already enacted in Texas and Missouri and ongoing federal momentum, religious institutes and orders should expect increased scrutiny of nondisclosure provisions and related settlement practices.
For organizations that have found it beneficial to add confidentiality terms to resolve sensitive claims, this trend may affect both existing agreements and future settlement strategies.
What Is Trey’s Law?
Trey’s Law—short for the “Terminating Restrictive Enforcement of Youth Settlements Act”—is designed to make certain nondisclosure agreements unenforceable when they prevent alleged victims of child sexual abuse from discussing the underlying abuse allegations.
Although the details vary by jurisdiction, the central objective is consistent: to treat confidentiality provisions in these settlements as contrary to public policy. Some versions of the legislation also reach previously executed agreements, raising potential retroactivity concerns.
Why This Matters Now
Momentum behind Trey’s Law is building. Versions have already been enacted in Texas and Missouri, while similar legislation has reportedly been introduced or considered in several additional states, including Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Georgia, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Ohio, and Alabama. At the federal level, legislation introduced by Senators Ted Cruz and Kirsten Gillibrand has advanced in the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. Combined, these developments reflect a broader legal and policy trend away from enforcing confidentiality provisions in matters involving sexual misconduct and vulnerable populations.
Key Considerations for Religious Institutes and Orders
For some religious orders, this shift may not require a significant change in practice. Accreditation standards associated with Praesidium already restrict the use of confidentiality settlements except where requested by a survivor “for grave and substantial reasons.”
For others, Trey’s Law raises important legal and operational questions, including enforceability risk, settlement strategy, reputational exposure, coordination with insurers and plaintiffs’ counsel, and the need for survivor-centered privacy protections that remain lawful if traditional NDAs become less viable.
A More Complicated Policy Picture
Supporters of Trey’s Law argue that confidentiality provisions can silence survivors, shield wrongdoing, and discourage reporting. In that view, limiting NDAs promotes transparency, accountability, and public safety.
At the same time, confidentiality has not always served only institutional interests. In some cases, survivors may prefer privacy to avoid unwanted attention, re-traumatization, or disclosure of deeply personal information. Confidentiality can also help facilitate resolution and provide closure for all parties.
As a result, the issue is not simply whether confidentiality is good or bad. It is also about who requests it, why it is used, and whether the law will continue to recognize it as an enforceable part of settlement.
Practical Takeaways
- Review current settlement practices for any reliance on confidentiality provisions.
- Assess existing agreements for potential exposure if state law changes.
- Monitor legislative developments in jurisdictions where the organization operates.
- Coordinate with insurers and counsel regarding litigation and settlement strategy.
- Evaluate alternative privacy protections that may remain enforceable even where NDAs are restricted.
Bottom Line
Even if a federal version of Trey’s Law does not pass in the near term, the broader direction is clear: legislatures and courts are showing increasing skepticism toward confidentiality provisions in child sexual abuse settlements.
For religious institutes operating in multiple jurisdictions, now is a good time to review policies, assess risk, and prepare for a legal environment in which confidentiality may be harder to preserve.
For questions regarding these developments, please contact Michael A. Airdo at mairdo@airdowerwas.com or Hector Barron at hbarron@airdowerwas.com.
