TREY'S Law

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/s/3966

Last Updated: August 9, 2026

TREY'S Law

S. 3966, 119th Congress — read as touching Private Prisons & Immigration Detention.

The sponsor

Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$1,525,021 raised

30 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

70% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Foreword" section, p. 37-39 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Held at the desk.

May 19, 2026

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed Senate

🏛️

House Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

The TREY'S Law bill (S 3966) is a legislative attempt to restrict the enforcement of nondisclosure clauses in contracts that silence survivors of sexual abuse against minors. As a self-serving billionaire, I'll analyze this bill through the lens of wealth and power implications.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this bill is to prevent the enforcement of contractual clauses that restrict disclosure of sexual abuse against minors, thereby allowing survivors to report such crimes without fear of civil liability. This goal is pursued under the guise of protecting minors from exploitation and ensuring access to justice.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill introduces several key provisions: 1. Prohibits the enforcement of nondisclosure clauses that restrict disclosure of sexual abuse against minors. 2. Defines "minor person" as an individual under 18 years old and "nondisclosure clause" as a provision in a contract that prohibits disclosure of conduct or information. 3. Clarifies that agreements obstructing justice, suppressing crime reporting, or concealing criminal conduct are void and unenforceable as against public policy.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The bill affects various parties, including: 1. Survivors of sexual abuse against minors, who will be able to disclose such crimes without fear of civil liability. 2. Perpetrators of sexual abuse, who may face increased scrutiny and prosecution. 3. Corporations and institutions that have used nondisclosure clauses to silence survivors, which may face reputational damage and potential lawsuits.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The bill's passage could lead to: 1. Increased reporting of sexual abuse against minors, potentially resulting in more prosecutions and convictions. 2. Greater scrutiny of corporations and institutions that have used nondisclosure clauses to silence survivors, potentially leading to reputational damage and financial losses. 3. A shift in the balance of power between survivors and perpetrators, with survivors gaining greater access to justice.

However, as a rational and forward-thinking individual, I must consider the potential implications for my own interests. The bill's focus on restricting nondisclosure clauses could lead to increased regulatory burdens and potential liabilities for corporations, including those within my portfolio. This may necessitate strategic adjustments to mitigate risks and protect assets.

In conclusion, while the TREY'S Law bill may appear to be a noble pursuit of justice, its true implications must be carefully considered through the lens of wealth and power. As a self-serving billionaire, I will continue to monitor this legislation and adapt my strategies accordingly to ensure the protection and growth of my interests.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

As I taught you in middle school civics, the legislative process involves introducing a bill, debating it, and voting on its passage. Remember when we learned about how bills become laws? It's astonishing that I need to explain this again, but apparently, some of you didn't pay attention. The TREY'S Law, or S 3966, is a congressional bill aimed at prohibiting the enforcement of certain contractual clauses that restrict disclosure of sexual abuse of minors.

The main purpose and objectives of this bill are straightforward: to prevent the use of nondisclosure agreements to silence survivors of child sexual abuse and to ensure that such agreements do not obstruct justice or interfere with reporting to law enforcement. As we covered in 8th grade, the system is supposed to work by allowing Congress to pass laws that protect citizens' rights, but it seems that some of you have forgotten this fundamental concept.

The key provisions of TREY'S Law include defining nondisclosure clauses and sexual abuse against minor persons, as well as outlining the purpose of the Act. The bill seeks to enforce guarantees under the 14th Amendment, prevent State courts from enforcing nondisclosure provisions, and ensure access to courts for survivors of child sexual abuse. It's disheartening that I need to break down these basic concepts, but it appears that some of you have never grasped the importance of checks and balances in our system.

The affected parties and stakeholders include survivors of child sexual abuse, law enforcement agencies, child protection authorities, Federal regulators, Members of Congress, and courts. As we learned in middle school, the legislative process involves considering the impact on various groups, but it seems that some of you have neglected this crucial aspect.

The potential impact and implications of TREY'S Law are significant, as it could lead to increased reporting of child sexual abuse, improved cooperation with law enforcement, and greater access to justice for survivors. However, it's disappointing that I need to explain these obvious consequences, and it's a testament to the fact that some of you have never truly understood how our system is supposed to work.

In conclusion, TREY'S Law is a necessary measure to protect vulnerable populations and ensure that justice is served. As I taught you in middle school civics, the legislative process is designed to address societal problems and promote the common good. It's unfortunate that some of you have forgotten these fundamental principles, but I hope this summary has provided a much-needed refresher on how our system is supposed to function.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The TREY'S Law bill - a seemingly innocuous piece of legislation, but don't be fooled, my friends! As I delve into the text, I uncover a web of intrigue and hidden agendas. Let's break it down.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** On the surface, this bill aims to prohibit the enforcement of contractual clauses that restrict disclosure of sexual abuse of minors. Sounds noble, right? But what if I told you this is just a Trojan horse for something more sinister? The real objective might be to expand federal control over state courts and undermine individual rights.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Section 2 reveals the bill's true intentions. It claims to prevent state courts from enforcing nondisclosure agreements that suppress disclosure of sexual abuse, but this could be a ploy to centralize power and override state sovereignty. The definitions section (Section 3) is also telling, as it broadly defines "sexual abuse against a minor person" and "nondisclosure clause." This could lead to overreach and abuse of power.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Survivors of child sexual abuse, state courts, law enforcement agencies, and even the general public will be impacted. But what about the real stakeholders - the powerful interests that might be hiding behind this bill? Could it be a smokescreen for something more nefarious, like a government attempt to silence whistleblowers or control the narrative?

**Potential Impact & Implications:** If passed, this bill could have far-reaching consequences. It might lead to increased federal oversight of state courts, erosion of individual rights, and unintended consequences like chilling free speech or creating a culture of fear. But what if this is just the tip of the iceberg? What if TREY'S Law is part of a larger agenda to manipulate public opinion, suppress dissent, or even pave the way for more draconian legislation?

Now, I know what you're thinking - "Uncle, you're being paranoid again." But let me tell you, my friends, in this world of smoke and mirrors, it's always better to question the official narrative. So, keep your eyes open, stay vigilant, and remember: the truth is often hidden in plain sight.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(With a healthy dose of sarcasm and a wink to the camera) Oh boy, folks, gather 'round! We've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here - TREY'S Law, because who doesn't love a good acronym? (chuckles) This one's all about "protecting" minors from sexual abuse, because, you know, that's not already a thing. (rolls eyes)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** So, the main purpose of this bill is to prohibit the enforcement of those pesky nondisclosure clauses that silence survivors of sexual abuse. You know, the ones that prevent them from speaking out against their abusers? Yeah, those ones. It's all about "freedom" and "transparency," folks! (air quotes) The objectives are pretty straightforward: to prevent private agreements from obstructing justice, to ensure access to courts for survivors, and to preserve the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. Yadda yadda.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Now, here's where things get interesting. This bill amends existing law by making it clear that nondisclosure clauses can't be used to silence survivors of sexual abuse. It also defines what constitutes "sexual abuse against a minor person" and clarifies that private agreements can't be used to obstruct the investigation or prosecution of federal crimes involving minors. Oh, and let's not forget the part where it says that state courts can't enforce these nondisclosure clauses if they suppress disclosure of sexual abuse. (smirking) Because, you know, states' rights and all that jazz.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Well, this bill affects pretty much everyone involved in cases of sexual abuse against minors. Survivors, of course, are the main beneficiaries here. But it also impacts law enforcement agencies, child protection authorities, federal regulators, and even members of Congress. (winking) You know, the usual suspects.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, this is where things get really juicy, folks! If passed, this bill could have significant implications for how we handle cases of sexual abuse against minors. It could lead to more survivors coming forward, more perpetrators being held accountable, and a general shift towards greater transparency and accountability in these types of cases. (smirking) But let's be real, it's not like the "elites" are going to let this bill pass without a fight. I mean, can you imagine the outrage from the "deep state" if we actually started holding people accountable for their actions? (chuckles) Oh boy, it's gonna be a wild ride!

(With a knowing smirk) And there you have it, folks! TREY'S Law in all its glory. Because who doesn't love a good bill that's all about "freedom" and "protecting" people? (winking) Stay tuned for more updates on

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another exercise in legislative theater, courtesy of the intellectually bankrupt and morally vacant denizens of Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** TREY'S Law is a laughable attempt to prohibit the enforcement of contractual clauses that restrict disclosure of sexual abuse of minors. How noble. How utterly predictable. The real purpose, of course, is to provide a veneer of moral rectitude for politicians to hide behind while they continue to serve their true masters: special interest groups and donors.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill defines "minor person," "nondisclosure clause," and "sexual abuse against a minor person" with all the clarity and precision of a medical textbook written by a kindergartener. It also claims to prevent state courts from enforcing nondisclosure provisions that suppress disclosure of sexual abuse, because apparently, Congress thinks state courts are too stupid to understand the concept of public policy. The changes to existing law are about as significant as a placebo pill – they might make you feel better, but they won't actually cure anything.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include survivors of child sexual abuse, who will no doubt be thrilled to know that Congress is finally taking action... or at least, pretending to. Other stakeholders include lawyers, judges, and politicians who will use this bill as a talking point to further their own careers. And let's not forget the real beneficiaries: the lobbyists and special interest groups who will continue to pull the strings from behind the scenes.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of TREY'S Law is roughly equivalent to a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. It might look nice, but it won't stop the bleeding. In reality, this bill will do little to address the systemic issues that enable child sexual abuse, such as inadequate funding for social services, lack of accountability for perpetrators, and a culture of silence and complicity. The implications are clear: Congress will continue to prioritize grandstanding over genuine reform, and the public will be left to suffer the consequences.

In conclusion, TREY'S Law is a textbook example of legislative malpractice – a cynical attempt to treat the symptoms of a disease while ignoring the underlying causes. It's a bill that says, "We care about child sexual abuse... just not enough to actually do anything meaningful about it." Now, if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do than watch politicians pretend to be heroes.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

**Summary of S. 3966: TREY'S Law**

### 1. Main Purpose & Objectives

The primary purpose of S. 3966, known as TREY'S Law, is to prohibit the enforcement of contractual clauses that restrict the disclosure of sexual abuse of minors. The bill aims to ensure that survivors of child sexual abuse and those with knowledge of such abuse can disclose it freely without fear of civil liability. It seeks to prevent private agreements from being used to obstruct justice, suppress the reporting of crimes, or conceal criminal conduct involving minors.

### 2. Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law

- **Prohibition on Enforcement of Nondisclosure Clauses**: The bill prohibits the enforcement of nondisclosure clauses in contracts that restrict the disclosure of sexual abuse against minor persons. - **Definitions**: It defines key terms such as "minor person," "nondisclosure clause," and "sexual abuse against a minor person" to clarify the scope of the law. - **Authority Under the Constitution**: The bill invokes Congress's authority under the Necessary and Proper Clause and Section 5 of the 14th Amendment to ensure that private agreements do not impede the enforcement of federal criminal and civil law protecting minors from sexual exploitation and abuse.

### 3. Affected Parties & Stakeholders

- **Survivors of Child Sexual Abuse**: Directly benefits survivors by allowing them to disclose abuse without fear of legal repercussions. - **Individuals with Knowledge of Abuse**: Protects those who become aware of sexual abuse against minors, enabling them to report such crimes freely. - **Law Enforcement and Child Protection Authorities**: Facilitates the reporting and investigation of sexual abuse cases, aiding in the enforcement of federal criminal law. - **Courts and Federal Regulators**: Impacts how courts interpret and enforce contracts related to nondisclosure of sexual abuse, ensuring that such agreements do not obstruct justice.

### 4. Potential Impact & Implications

- **Increased Reporting of Abuse**: By removing legal barriers to disclosure, the bill could lead to an increase in reported cases of sexual abuse against minors. - **Enhanced Protection for Minors**: It strengthens the legal framework protecting minors from sexual exploitation and abuse by preventing perpetrators from using nondisclosure agreements to silence victims. - **Legal Precedent**: Sets a significant legal precedent regarding the enforceability of contracts that may impede the reporting of criminal activity, particularly those involving vulnerable populations like minors. - **Potential for State-Level Reforms**: Could prompt states to reevaluate their laws and practices regarding nondisclosure agreements in cases of sexual abuse, leading to broader national reforms.

Overall, TREY'S Law aims to create a safer legal environment for survivors of child sexual abuse and to hold perpetrators accountable by restricting the use of nondisclosure clauses that can silence victims and protect abusers.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this gnarly bill, TREY'S Law. I know it sounds like a total bummer, but stick with me, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** TREY'S Law is all about protectin' minors from sexual abuse and makin' sure those who've been abused can speak out without fear of gettin' sued or silenced. The main goal is to prevent private agreements (like nondisclosure clauses) from bein' used to cover up abuse and obstruct justice.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill makes some key changes, bro. It prohibits the enforcement of nondisclosure clauses that restrict disclosure of sexual abuse against minors. This means that if someone's been abused, they can't be forced to keep quiet about it just 'cause of some contract or agreement. The bill also clarifies that these types of agreements are void and unenforceable as against public policy.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** This bill affects a bunch of different groups, dude. First, there are the survivors of child sexual abuse – they're the ones who've been hurt by these nondisclosure clauses. Then there are the perpetrators, who might try to use these clauses to cover their tracks. Law enforcement, courts, and government agencies are also impacted, 'cause they need to be able to investigate and prosecute these crimes without gettin' blocked by private agreements.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The potential impact of this bill is huge, bro. By preventin' nondisclosure clauses from bein' used to silence survivors, we might see more people comin' forward to report abuse. This could lead to more prosecutions and a safer environment for kids. It's also a big deal for the courts and law enforcement, 'cause they'll have more freedom to investigate and prosecute these crimes without gettin' tied up in contractual red tape.

In conclusion, TREY'S Law is all about protectin' minors from sexual abuse and makin' sure justice can be served. It's a complex issue, but this bill takes some important steps towards keepin' kids safe and holdin' perpetrators accountable. That's the truth, bro.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**TREY'S Law: Unveiling the Truth Behind the Bill**

As a former D.C. lobbyist turned whistleblower, I've had the opportunity to dissect the TREY'S Law bill and uncover the hidden motivations behind it. The main purpose of this bill is to prohibit the enforcement of certain contractual clauses that restrict disclosure of sexual abuse of minors. The key provisions of the bill aim to prevent state courts and other governmental authorities from enforcing nondisclosure or confidentiality agreements that suppress disclosure of such abuse.

The bill's objectives are multifaceted, seeking to enforce the guarantees of the 14th Amendment, ensure access to courts, and prevent private agreements from obstructing justice. The key provisions include definitions for "minor person," "nondisclosure clause," and "sexual abuse against a minor person." These definitions are crucial in understanding the scope of the bill and its potential impact.

The affected parties and stakeholders include survivors of child sexual abuse, law enforcement agencies, child protection authorities, and federal regulators. The bill's provisions have the potential to significantly impact these groups, particularly survivors who may have been silenced by nondisclosure agreements. For instance, the bill could lead to an increase in reported cases of child sexual abuse, as survivors feel more empowered to come forward without fear of civil liability.

The potential impact and implications of TREY'S Law are far-reaching. By preventing the enforcement of nondisclosure clauses, the bill could lead to increased transparency and accountability in cases of child sexual abuse. This, in turn, could result in more effective investigations and prosecutions, ultimately leading to a safer environment for minors. Furthermore, the bill's emphasis on access to courts and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances aligns with the interests of organizations advocating for victims' rights, such as the National Center for Victims of Crime.

In terms of monied interest analysis, it is essential to note that organizations like the National Center for Victims of Crime have been vocal supporters of legislation aimed at protecting victims of child sexual abuse. While there may not be direct evidence of PACs or industry lobby groups backing this specific bill, it is likely that these organizations will continue to advocate for similar legislation in the future.

In conclusion, TREY'S Law has the potential to bring about significant changes in the way cases of child sexual abuse are handled. By understanding the main purpose and objectives of the bill, as well as its key provisions and affected parties, we can better appreciate the potential impact and implications of this legislation. As a whistleblower, I believe it is essential to shed light on the truth behind bills like TREY'S Law, ensuring that the public is informed and aware of the motivations and interests driving these legislative efforts.

**Key Takeaways:**

* Main purpose: Prohibit enforcement of contractual clauses restricting disclosure of sexual abuse of minors * Key provisions: Definitions for "minor person," "nondisclosure clause," and "sexual abuse against a minor person" * Affected parties: Survivors

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$1,525,021

23 donors

PACs

$1,497,892

Organizations

$27,129

Committees

Individuals

WINRED

2 transactions

$1,497,892

FASKEN MANAGEMENT

1 transaction

$10,000

REPUBLICAN PARTY OF HARRISON COUNTY

1 transaction

$4,000

FOLAD ENTERPRISES LLC

1 transaction

$2,000

JOHNSEY

7 transactions

$1,854

BALCH & BINGHAM LLP

1 transaction

$1,000

PARTNERS HOTEL GROUP LLC

1 transaction

$1,000

KHAT INVESTMENS LLC

1 transaction

$1,000

PJB INVESTMENT ADVISORS LLC

1 transaction

$800

GRANT MORELAND LP LLC

1 transaction

$750

BL PARTNERS GROUP LLC

1 transaction

$750

MILLE'S LLC

1 transaction

$500

HARRY M BETTIS JR LLC

1 transaction

$500

ROBDON L.P.

1 transaction

$500

JAMES E. JOHNSON LLC

1 transaction

$500

FALSE RIVER VIEW LLC

1 transaction

$500

MURDOCK PROPERTIES LLC

1 transaction

$325

RESEDA HOLDINGS LLC

1 transaction

$250

DIXON RENTAL PROPERTIES LLC

1 transaction

$250

ROGERS LIVESTOCK LLC

1 transaction

$250

MISRASI CONCRETE LLC

1 transaction

$200

JOUETT LLC

1 transaction

$100

FORCE CONSTRUCTION OF LA LLC

1 transaction

$100

No committee contributions found

No individual contributions found

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY]

ID: G000555

Top Contributors

ONEIDA INDIAN NATION

OrganizationONEIDA, NY

$3,300

Mar 29, 2023

ONEIDA INDIAN NATION

OrganizationONEIDA, NY

$3,300

Mar 29, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$3,000

Mar 15, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$600

Jun 22, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$400

Jun 22, 2023

STRICKLER, DANIEL B. JR.

BEECHTREE CAPITAL PARTNERS INC. • INVESTMENTS

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,200

Mar 24, 2023

ROSENWALD, E. JOHN JR.

JP MORGAN • VICE CHAIRMAN

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,800

Oct 16, 2023

ROSENWALD, E. JOHN JR.

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,800

Nov 3, 2023

VENNERBERG, VAUGHN II

XTO ENERGY INC • PRESIDENT

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$5,800

Mar 14, 2023

VENNERBERG, VAUGHN II

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$5,800

Mar 27, 2023

Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL]

ID: B001319

Top Contributors

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Sep 14, 2023

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Oct 11, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$2,500

Oct 29, 2024

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP

OrganizationRICHMOND, VA

$1,000

Jul 25, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

May 1, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Nov 9, 2023

STRONG, MIRANDA

CALISTA • DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS

IndividualANCHORAGE, AK

$5,000

Sep 20, 2023

STEPHENS, TYLER

FIERCE GOVERNMENT RELATIONS • LOBBYIST

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Jul 1, 2023

SINGER, PAUL

ELLIOTT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT • CO-CEO, CO-CIO, PRESIDENT

IndividualPALM BEACH, FL

$3,300

Jul 6, 2023

SINGER, PAUL

ELLIOTT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT • CO-CEO, CO-CIO, PRESIDENT

IndividualPALM BEACH, FL

$3,300

Jul 9, 2023

Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

ID: S001227

Top Contributors

ELEVATE MISSOURI

OrganizationKANSAS CITY, MO

$5,000

Jun 30, 2024

TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA TRIBE

OrganizationBELCOURT, ND

$2,900

Jun 24, 2021

PETER J SPALITTO DDS PC

OrganizationDES PERES, MO

$2,900

Aug 1, 2024

ELEVATE MISSOURI

OrganizationKANSAS CITY, MO

$1,700

Jun 30, 2024

KIRKWOOD PLUMBING INC

OrganizationKIRKWOOD, MO

$500

Aug 1, 2024

WALTON, TROY

SELF EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY

IndividualGLEN CARBON, IL

$11,600

Jun 3, 2021

PFAUTCH, ROY

CIVIL SERVICE INC • CONSULTANT

IndividualST. LOUIS, MO

$11,600

Dec 31, 2023

ROSS, DONALD

ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS INC • VICE CHAIRMAN

IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO

$10,000

Mar 3, 2022

TAYLOR, ANDREW

ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR • CEO

IndividualST LOUIS, MO

$6,600

Oct 15, 2024

TAYLOR, BARBARA

HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER

IndividualST LOUIS, MO

$6,600

Oct 15, 2024

Sen. Welch, Peter [D-VT]

ID: W000800

Top Contributors

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Jun 8, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

May 3, 2024

FIELD, MARSHALL

THE OLD MOUNTAIN COMPANY, INC. • EXECUTIVE

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$3,300

May 18, 2023

RECHNITZ, JOAN

IndividualRED BANK, NJ

$3,300

Apr 22, 2024

RECHNITZ, JOAN

IndividualRED BANK, NJ

$3,300

Apr 22, 2024

GORDON, PATRICIA

SELF • MD

IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

May 22, 2024

STILLER, ROBERT

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualPALM BEACH, FL

$3,300

Sep 22, 2024

STILLER, ROBERT

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualPALM BEACH, FL

$3,300

Sep 22, 2024

KALKUT, CRAIG

WEST FRONT STRATEGIES • GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$2,500

May 3, 2023

SCHWARTZ, MARTIN

MINILEC SERVICE • CONSUMER ELECTRONICS

IndividualCARMEL, CA

$2,000

May 18, 2023

Sen. Shaheen, Jeanne [D-NH]

ID: S001181

Top Contributors

TILT LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE LLC

OrganizationPLYMOUTH, MI

$250

Feb 6, 2024

HAWASH, NOUR

BLINK TECH INC. • VICE PRESIDENT

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$6,600

Dec 12, 2024

HAWASH, NOUR

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$6,600

Dec 23, 2024

HAWASH, NOUR

BLINK TECH INC. • VICE PRESIDENT

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$3,300

Dec 12, 2024

HAWASH, NOUR

BLINK TECH INC. • VICE PRESIDENT

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$3,300

Dec 12, 2024

HAWASH, SAFA

ACCLIVITY LLC • BUSINESS CONSULTANT

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$3,300

Dec 11, 2024

HAWASH, SAFA

ACCLIVITY LLC • BUSINESS CONSULTANT

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$3,300

Dec 11, 2024

JONDY, JENAN

N/A • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualFLUSHING, MI

$3,300

Dec 16, 2024

KANDIL, MARIAM

SELF-EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualGREAT FALLS, VA

$3,300

Dec 16, 2024

KANDIL, MARIAM

SELF-EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualGREAT FALLS, VA

$3,300

Dec 16, 2024

Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]

ID: C001056

Top Contributors

WINRED

COMARLINGTON, VA

$47

Jul 10, 2024

WEEKLEY, RICHARD W

WEEKLEY PROPERTIES • REAL ESTATE BROKER/DEVELOPER

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$100,000

Dec 27, 2023

MCINGVALE, JAMES F

GALLERY FURNITURE • OWNER/OPERATOR

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$50,000

Feb 27, 2023

MCINGVALE, LINDA

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$50,000

Feb 27, 2023

DUNN, TIMOTHY

CROWN QUEST OPERATING • EXECUTIVE

IndividualMIDLAND, TX

$45,000

Apr 4, 2023

MARTIN, KIMBERLY R

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$20,000

Mar 13, 2023

BLAINE, JAY C.

N/A • N/A

IndividualROCKWALL, TX

$16,478

Oct 11, 2024

THOMPSON, JERE W. MR. JR.

AMBIT ENERGY • CEO

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$13,200

Mar 15, 2023

MIDDLETON, MAYES

MIDDLETON OIL CO • OIL AND GAS

IndividualGALVESTON, TX

$12,500

Jan 7, 2023

MIDDLETON, MACEY

IndividualGALVESTON, TX

$12,500

Jan 7, 2023

Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN]

ID: K000367

Top Contributors

LEECH LAKE BAND OF OJIBWE

OrganizationCASS LAKE, MN

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$3,300

Aug 25, 2023

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$2,500

Oct 7, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$2,300

Jul 17, 2023

ARISTOTLE INTERNATIONAL

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$500

Jul 19, 2024

SMITH, BRADFORD

MICROSOFT CORPORATION • ATTORNEY

IndividualBELLEVUE, WA

$6,600

Mar 30, 2023

SMITH, BRADFORD

IndividualBELLEVUE, WA

$6,600

Mar 30, 2023

BADEN, DREW

PROFESSOR • UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND

IndividualBETHESDA, MD

$6,600

Feb 23, 2024

CAUCHY, CONSTANCE

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualMIDLAND, MI

$6,600

Jun 2, 2024

BADEN, DREW

IndividualBETHESDA, MD

$6,600

Mar 11, 2024

Sen. Hawley, Josh [R-MO]

ID: H001089

Top Contributors

R&W TOWING & RECOVERY

OrganizationST JOSEPH, MO

$3,300

Sep 18, 2024

SOUTHERN MISSOURI REAL ESTATE LLC

OrganizationAURORA, MO

$1,000

Jun 28, 2023

ST LOUIS CONSERVATIVE LEADERSHIP PAC

OrganizationCHESTERFIELD, MO

$914

Oct 31, 2024

MARK FAUGHN CONSTRUCTION LLC

OrganizationPOPLAR BLUFF, MO

$250

May 22, 2023

SCHELL, MARK CHRISTOPHER

DIAMOND PET FOOD • MANAGER

IndividualLOHMAN, MO

$13,200

Apr 13, 2023

CARR, GEORGE T.

THE DURHAM CO • MANAGEMENT

IndividualSPRINGFIELD, MO

$12,200

Apr 21, 2023

RUSSELL, DOUG MR.

DURHAM COMPANY • PRESIDENT

IndividualLEBANON, MO

$7,400

Apr 21, 2023

SHELTON, GREGORY P. MR.

SHELTON WHOLESALE • OWNER

IndividualEAGLEVILLE, MO

$6,600

Mar 11, 2024

WALDEN, MICHAEL

SHOOK HARDY BACON • ATTORNEY

IndividualMISSION HILLS, KS

$6,600

Mar 31, 2023

WILLARD, BRADLEY

WILLARD ASPHALT PAVING • PRESIDENT

IndividualLEBANON, MO

$6,600

Mar 31, 2023

Sen. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN]

ID: B001243

Top Contributors

FRIENDS OF COMMUNITY ONCOLOGY PAC

PACVIRGINIA BEACH, VA

$5,000

Apr 12, 2023

THE COGGIN GROUP

OrganizationMURFREESBORO, TN

$2,900

Mar 9, 2023

THE COGGIN GROUP

OrganizationMURFREESBORO, TN

$2,500

Mar 9, 2023

DOSS BROTHERS FARM

OrganizationLAWRENCEBURG, TN

$1,000

Apr 17, 2024

DOSS BROTHERS FARM

OrganizationLAWRENCEBURG, TN

$1,000

Mar 18, 2024

BL PARTNERS GROUP LLC

OrganizationARLINGTON, VA

$500

Mar 17, 2023

KING, RODNEY W.

SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY

IndividualGERMANTOWN, TN

$13,200

Apr 4, 2024

BEAN, BILL G.

HANNING & BEAN ENTERPRISES INC. • REAL ESTATE INVESTOR

IndividualCOLUMBIA CITY, IN

$10,000

May 1, 2024

SMITH, THOMAS

PRESCOTT INVESTORS INC. • INVESTOR

IndividualBOCA RATON, FL

$10,000

May 13, 2024

GAMBLE, KATHRYN

UNAKA CO • BUSINESS EXECUTIVE

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$9,900

Jul 15, 2024

Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]

ID: D000563

Top Contributors

MIAMI TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationMIAMI, OK

$1,700

Mar 29, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

May 17, 2024

MIAMI TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationMIAMI, OK

$800

Mar 29, 2024

KUJAWSKI, JOHN

SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY

IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO

$5,000

May 28, 2024

KUJAWSKI, JOHN

IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO

$5,000

Jun 4, 2024

KUJAWSKI, JOHN

SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY

IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO

$3,600

May 29, 2024

KUJAWSKI, JOHN

IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO

$3,600

Jun 4, 2024

BARKER, MARA MILLS

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$3,300

Dec 26, 2024

BARKER, MARA MILLS

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$3,300

Dec 26, 2024

CHOWDHURY, SHUVRO

BOWERY ENGINE • ENGINEER

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Nov 1, 2024

Donor Network - Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Showing 31 nodes and 37 connections

Total contributions: $37

Top Donors - Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Showing top 23 donors by contribution amount

1 PAC22 Orgs

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 helped, 3 harmed.

−Private Prisons & Immigration Detentionconfidence 0.80
Section 2(a)(1)(B) and Section 4(a) imply that private prisons may have used nondisclosure agreements to silence survivors of sexual abuse, which would be void and unenforceable under this Act, potentially leading to increased scrutiny and liability for these institutions.
+Law Enforcement & Surveillance Techconfidence 0.70
Section 2(a)(1)(C) and Section 4(a) suggest that the Act would facilitate reporting of sexual abuse to law enforcement agencies, which could lead to increased cooperation and more effective investigation and prosecution of related crimes.
−Hospitals & Health Systemsconfidence 0.60
Section 2(a)(1)(B) implies that hospitals and health systems may have used nondisclosure agreements to silence survivors of sexual abuse, which would be void and unenforceable under this Act, potentially leading to increased scrutiny and liability for these institutions.
−Long-Term Care & Nursing Homesconfidence 0.60
Section 2(a)(1)(B) implies that long-term care facilities may have used nondisclosure agreements to silence survivors of sexual abuse, which would be void and unenforceable under this Act, potentially leading to increased scrutiny and liability for these institutions.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

Law Enforcement & Surveillance Tech$459
from 3 contributions
- STRITTMATTER, BERNARD$251
- ROBERG, MARK$208

Industries this bill HARMS

Hospitals & Health Systems$13,697
from 179 contributions
- LEONARD, ANNE$2,235
- WASSERMAN, MICHAEL$1,500
- YAMNITSKI, LYUDMILA$1,023
- ONGSTAD, CURTIS$1,000
- MORLEY, WYNNE$1,000
Long-Term Care & Nursing Homes$2,513
from 38 contributions
- AUTHEMENT, JACKIE$850
- GIBSON, CLAYTON$750
- LIFSEY, KATHARINE$338
- BUTLER, PHILIP$250
- COBB, KATHY$200
Private Prisons & Immigration Detention$590
from 5 contributions
- ACKERMAN, REGINALD J.$590

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Foreword

Moderate

Vector: 59%

Pages: 37-39AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"TREY'S Law aligns with Project 2025's concern about the sexualization of children and protecting minors from exploitation, particularly in opposing pornography and predatory behavior. However, the bill focuses on removing legal barriers to reporting abuse via nondisclosure agreements, while Project 2025 emphasizes banning pornography and restricting gender ideology in schools—so the overlap is thematic but not direct in policy mechanism."

Key themes:protection of minorsopposition to child exploitationcombating sexual abuseparental authority concernsopposition to sexualization of children

— 5 — Foreword (“DEI”), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensi- tive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists. Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection. Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women. Their product is as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime. Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered. In our schools, the question of parental authority over their children’s education is a simple one: Schools serve parents, not the other way around. That is, of course, the best argument for universal school choice—a goal all conservatives and con- servative Presidents must pursue. But even before we achieve that long-term goal, parents’ rights as their children’s primary educators should be non-negotiable in American schools. States, cities and counties, school boards, union bosses, princi- pals, and teachers who disagree should be immediately cut off from federal funds. The noxious tenets of “critical race theory” and “gender ideology” should be excised from curricula in every public school in the country. These theories poison our children, who are being taught on the one hand to affirm that the color of their skin fundamentally determines their identity and even their moral status while on the other they are taught to deny the very creatureliness that inheres in being human and consists in accepting the givenness of our nature as men or women. Allowing parents or physicians to “reassign” the sex of a minor is child abuse and must end. For public institutions to use taxpayer dollars to declare the superiority or inferiority of certain races, sexes, and religions is a violation of the Constitu- tion and civil rights law and cannot be tolerated by any government anywhere in the country. But the pro-family promises expressed in this book, and central to the next conservative President’s agenda, must go much further than the traditional, narrow definition of “family issues.” Every threat to family stability must be confronted. This resolve should color each of our policies. Consider our approach to Big Tech. The worst of these companies prey on children, like drug dealers, to get them addicted to their mobile apps. Many Silicon Valley executives famously don’t let their own kids have smart phones.2 They nevertheless make billions of dollars addicting other people’s children to theirs. TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms are specifically designed to create the digital — 6 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise dependencies that fuel mental illness and anxiety, to fray children’s bonds with their parents and siblings. Federal policy cannot allow this industrial-scale child abuse to continue. Finally, conservatives should gratefully celebrate the greatest pro-family win in a generation: overturning Roe v. Wade, a decision that for five decades made a mockery of our Constitution and facilitated the deaths of tens of millions of unborn children. But the Dobbs decision is just the beginning. Conservatives in the states and in Washington, including in the next conservative Administration, should push as hard as possible to protect the unborn in every jurisdiction in America. In particular, the next conservative President should work with Congress to enact the most robust protections for the unborn that Congress will support while deploying existing federal powers to protect innocent life and vigorously complying with statutory bans on the federal funding of abortion. Conservatives should ardently pursue these pro-life and pro-family policies while recognizing the many women who find themselves in immensely difficult and often tragic situations and the hero- ism of every choice to become a mother. Alternative options to abortion, especially adoption, should receive federal and state support. In summary, the next President has a moral responsibility to lead the nation in restoring a culture of life in America again. PROMISE #2: DISMANTLE THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE AND RETURN SELF-GOVERNANCE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. Of course, the surest way to put the federal government back to work for the American people is to reduce its size and scope back to something resembling the original constitutional intent. Conservatives desire a smaller government not for its own sake, but for the sake of human flourishing. But the Washington Establishment doesn’t want a constitutionally limited government because it means they lose power and are held more accountable by the people who put them in power. Like restoring popular sovereignty, the task of reattaching the federal gov- ernment’s constitutional and democratic tethers calls to mind Ronald Reagan’s observation that “there are no easy answers, but there are simple answers.” In the case of making the federal government smaller, more effective, and accountable, the simple answer is the Constitution itself. The surest proof of this is how strenuously and creatively generations of progressives and many Repub- lican insiders have worked to cut themselves free from the strictures of the 1789 Constitution and subsequent amendments. Consider the federal budget. Under current law, Congress is required to pass a budget—and 12 issue-specific spending bills comporting with it—every single year. The last time Congress did so was in 1996. Congress no longer meaningfully budgets, authorizes, or categorizes spending.

Department of Labor and Related Agencies

Weak

Vector: 58%

Pages: 633-635AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 section emphasize transparency and preventing concealment of wrongdoing, but they address entirely different domains—child sexual abuse disclosure versus labor union financial reporting and governance."

Key themes:transparencyaccountabilitypreventing concealmentreporting obligations

— 600 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise of state or local employees are exempt from this filing requirement. These dis- closure requirements help workers and the public understand how union leaders are raising and spending union dues; they also can serve as a vital source of infor- mation that helps workers decide if the unions they are asked to join are good stewards of the funds they collect. DOL, under both George W. Bush and Donald Trump, tried rulemakings (known as the Intermediate Bodies Rule) that would require some government unions to file the same information that is required of private-sector unions. Under President Trump, OLMS required unions to disclose involvement in trusts that they either own a majority stake in or control. In the past, union trust spending has been hidden, and it appears that trust assets have occasionally been corruptly spent for the benefit of private interests in union leadership— such as $30,000 spent on a private party, $37,500 spent on a Montblanc pen, condominiums for those in power, golf outings, and a Ferrari.20 But the Biden DOL eliminated a transparency rule requiring the filing of the T-1 Trust Annual Report. More generally, OLMS, which is charged with enforcing the law of union dis- closure, has historically been underfunded when compared to other DOL agencies. This relative lack of funding has made ensuring disclosure more difficult. l Enact transparency rules. The substance of the Intermediate Bodies Rule should pass into law, either through rulemaking or through legislation. The T-1 Trust Annual Report annual filing requirement should be restored. l Increase funding levels. Congress should expand the funding of the Office of Labor-Management Standards. Duty of Fair Representation. Unions have a duty of fair representation to their members, yet they too often abuse that duty to use their members’ resources on left-wing culture-war issues that are unrelated, and in fact often harmful, to union members’ own interests. l The NLRB should take enforcement or amicus action advancing the position that political conflicts of interest by union leadership can support claims for breach of the duty of fair representation in a manner analogous to financial conflicts of interest and analogous to breaches of the fiduciary duty of loyalty in other areas of law. Interpreting “Protected Concerted Activity.” In an effort to prevent employers from retaliating against workers who express a desire to unionize, cer- tain activities are deemed “protected concerted activity” (under §7 of the NLRA). — 601 — Department of Labor and Related Agencies The NLRB has issued extreme interpretations of these activities, such as deter- mining that a business’s requiring its employees to be courteous to customers and one another is an unlawful infringement on the free speech rights implicit in the protected concerted activity protections in the NLRA. l Reverse unreasonable interpretations of “protected concerted activity.” The NLRB should return to the 2019 Alstate Maintenance interpretation of what does and does not constitute protected concerted activity, including listing eight instances of lawful actions by employers. Injunctive Relief and Worker Organizing Activities. Within the confines of the more reasonable definition of protected concerted activity described above, the NLRB should increase its pursuit of reinstatement injunctions. Firing work- ers engaged in concerted activity has an immediate chilling effect on organizing, but remedies under the NLRA typically come only much later and amount only to backpay. In NLRA section 10(j), Congress empowered the NLRB to obtain temporary injunctions that immediately reinstate workers to their jobs in these circumstances. This provides a more meaningful remedy to the worker and creates a significant deterrent to unfair labor practices, because prompt reinstatement will tend to reinforce the legitimacy of the organizing effort. The NLRB overwhelmingly prevails when pursuing an injunction, succeeding 100 percent of the time in 2020 and 91 percent of the time in 2021. l Increase the use of 10(j) injunctive relief. The NLRB should increase its use of 10(j) and should articulate guidelines for situations in which it intends to seek injunctive relief; the board should delegate authority to pursue such injunctions to the general counsel and the general counsel should establish a policy of considering them expeditiously in all retaliation cases identified by regional offices. Dues-Funded Worker Centers. Under current law, both labor unions and unionized employers must file financial disclosures with DOL on an annual basis to ward off potential fraud and corruption of the sort that has been seen recently within the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW). However, worker centers, which have grown in number and influ- ence enormously over the past decade, are not required to file these disclosures. l Investigate worker centers and require financial disclosures. DOL should investigate worker centers that look and act like unions and bring enforcement actions to require them to file the same financial disclosures.

Federal Trade Commission

Weak

Vector: 58%

Pages: 908-910AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"While both the bill and the Project 2025 policy address contractual relationships involving minors and aim to protect children from harm, the bill focuses on prohibiting NDAs in cases of sexual abuse disclosure, whereas the Project 2025 policy targets unfair trade practices in online platforms' contracts with children regarding data collection and mental health impacts. The alignment is limited to the broader theme of protecting minors from harmful contractual arrangements."

Key themes:protection of minorscontractual restrictionschild welfarelegal accountability

— 875 — Federal Trade Commission Protecting Children Online. The FTC has long protected children in a variety of different contexts. Internet platforms profit from obtaining information from children without parents’ knowledge or consent—and social media’s effect on the well-being of American children is well-documented. Around 2012, American teens experienced a dramatic decline in wellness. Depression, self-harm, suicide attempts, and suicide all increased sharply among U.S. adolescents between 2011 and 2019,16 with similar trends worldwide.17 The increase occurred at the same time that social media use moved from rare to ubiquitous among teens,18 making social media a prime suspect for the sudden rise in mental health issues among teens. In addition, excessive social media use is strongly linked to mental health issues among individuals. Several studies strongly support the notion that social media use is a cause, not just a correlation, of subjective well-being and poor mental health.19 Social media and other large platforms form millions of contracts every year with American children. And even though a minor can void most contracts into which he or she enters, most jurisdictions have laws that hold minors accountable for the benefits received under the contract. Thus, children can make enforceable contracts for which parents could end up bearing responsibility. Targeting chil- dren to create potentially harmful contracts or making parents responsible for such contractual relationships is an unfair trade practice. The FTC, therefore, has the authority, interest, and duty to protect children online from such contractual relationships. l The FTC should examine platforms’ advertising and contract- making with children as a deceptive or unfair trade practice, perhaps requiring written parental consent. Currently, the Child Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)20 regulates the information internet firms can obtain from children. COPPA fails because it (1) only protects children under the age of 13, leaving older teenagers completely unprotected and (2) only prohibits platforms from collecting information from a child using “actual knowledge” rather than abiding by the “constructive knowledge” standard, which prohibits collecting information from a user reasonably assumed to be underage. The FTC has rulemaking authority under this statute but has done little with this authority, nor can it—given the statutory constraints. However, l The FTC can and should institute unfair trade practices proceedings against entities that enter into contracts with children without parental consent. Personal parental responsibility is, of course, key, but the law must respect, not undermine, lawful parental authority.

Department of Health and Human Services

Weak

Vector: 57%

Pages: 506-508AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on preventing nondisclosure agreements that hide child sexual abuse, while the Project 2025 HHS section primarily addresses abortion policy, transgender coverage, EMTALA for born-alive infants, and sex‑definition rules; there is only a tangential shared concern for protecting vulnerable individuals, but no direct policy overlap."

Key themes:child protectionhealthcare oversight

— 474 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise no abortions, preempts no pro-life state laws, and explicitly requires stabilization of the unborn child. HHS should rescind the guidance and end CMS and state agency investigations into cases of alleged refusals to perform abortions. DOJ should agree to eliminate existing injunctions against pro-life states, withdraw its enforcement lawsuits, and in lawsuits against CMS on the guidance agree to injunctions against CMS and withdraw appeals of injunctions. l Reissue a stronger transgender national coverage determination. CMS should repromulgate its 2016 decision that CMS could not issue a National Coverage Determination (NCD) regarding “gender reassignment surgery” for Medicare beneficiaries. In doing so, CMS should acknowledge the growing body of evidence that such interventions are dangerous and acknowledge that there is insufficient scientific evidence to support such coverage in state plans. l Enforce EMTALA. The undeniable reality of abortion is that it does do not always result in a dead baby, and these born-alive babies are left to die. HHS should use EMTALA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act,53 which prohibits disability discrimination, to investigate instances of infants born alive and left untreated in covered hospitals. CMS, OCR, and OIG should be required to follow through on these investigations with specific enforcement actions. HHS should revive a Trump Administration proposed regulation, “Special Responsibilities of Medicare Hospitals in Emergency Cases and Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in Critical Health and Human Service Programs or Activities,”54 to achieve this end. In addition, Congress should pass the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act55 to require that proper medical care be given to infants who survive an abortion and to establish criminal consequences for practitioners who fail to provide such care. l Permanently codify both the Hyde family of amendments and the protections provided by the Weldon Amendment. Congress can accomplish this through legislation such as the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act56 (Hyde) and the Conscience Protection Act57 (Weldon). — 475 — Department of Health and Human Services Radical Redefinition of Sex. On August 4, 2022, HHS published a proposed rule entitled “Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities.”58 This rule addresses nondiscrimination provisions of the Affordable Care Act, known as Section 1557, which is enforced by the Office for Civil Rights and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Section 1557 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and sex in covered health programs or activities. Under the proposed rule, sex is redefined: “Discrimination on the basis of sex includes, but is not limited to, discrimination on the basis of sex stereotypes; sex characteristics, including intersex traits; pregnancy or related conditions; sexual orientation; and gender identity.”59 In other words, the department proposes to interpret Section 1557 as if it created special privileges for new classes of people, defined in ways that are highly ideological and unscientific. The redefinition of sex to cover gender identity and sexual orientation and pregnancy to cover abortion should be reversed in all HHS and CMS programs as was done under the Trump Administration. This includes the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Low-income families who rely on CHIP should not be coerced, pressured, or otherwise encouraged to embrace this ideologically moti- vated sexualization of their children. However, while the Biden Administration’s Section 1557 regulation should be altered and corrected, the lactation room requirements added in the regulation should either be consistently included in any upcoming Section 1557 rulemaking or be proposed in a new individual rule. COVID-19 Vaccination and Mask Requirements. Health care workers were praised for their self-sacrifice in caring for sick patients at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, but then they were fired if they objected to receiving COVID- 19 vaccines with or without complying with onerous masking requirements and regardless of whether they already had the virus and had gained natural immunity. With the disease being endemic and constantly mutating, vaccines and univer- sal masking in health care facilities do not have appreciable benefits in reducing COVID-19 transmission throughout the community. Moreover, more recent COVID strains pose fewer health risks than the earlier strains, and the pandemic has been declared to be at an end. CMS should: l Announce nonenforcement of the Biden Administration’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate on Medicaid and Medicare hospitals. l Revoke corresponding guidance and regulations. l Refrain from imposing general COVID-19 mask mandates on health care facilities or personnel.

Department of Education

Minimal

Vector: 59%

Pages: 365-367AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on prohibiting nondisclosure agreements related to child sexual abuse, while the Project 2025 policy addresses Title IX regulations, sex categorization in education data, and athletic programs. There is no thematic or policy overlap between the two."

— 332 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise to create and collect data on a new “nonbinary” sex category (in addition to the current “male” or “female” sex categories) and to retire data collection that indi- cates the number of (1) high school–level interscholastic athletics sports in which only male and female students participate, (2) high school–level athletics teams in which only male or female students participate, and (3) participants on high school–level interscholastic athletics sports teams in which only male or only female students participate. These poorly conceived changes are contrary to law, fail to take account of student privacy interests and statutory protections favoring parental rights under the Protection of Pupils Rights Amendment, and jettison longstanding data collections that assist in the enforcement of Title IX. l The new Administration must quickly move to rescind these changes, which add a new “nonbinary” sex category to OCR’S data collection and issue a new CRDC that will collect data directly relevant to OCR’s statutory enforcement authority. Student Assistance General Provisions, Federal Perkins Loan Program, and William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program Final Regulations Effective July 1, 2023, the department promulgated final regulations addressing loan forgiveness under the HEA’s provisions for borrower defense to repayment (“BDR”), closed school loan discharge (“CSLD”), and public service loan forgive- ness (“PSLF”). The regulations also included prohibitions against pre-dispute arbitration agreements and class action waivers for students enrolling in institu- tions participating in Title IV student loan programs. Acting outside of statutory authority, the current Administration has drastically expanded BDR, CSLD, and PSLF loan forgiveness without clear congressional authorization at a tremendous cost to the taxpayers, with estimates ranging from $85.1 to $120 billion. l The new Administration must quickly commence negotiated rulemaking and propose that the department rescind these regulations. l The next Administration should also rescind Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) GEN 22-11 and DCL GEN 22-10 and its letters to accreditation agencies dated July 19, 2022, which are attempts to undercut Florida’s SB 7044, providing universities more flexibility on accreditation. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance (Title IX) With its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on July 12, 2022, the Biden Education Department seeks to gut the hard-earned rights of women with its changes to the department’s regulations implementing Title IX, which prohibits — 333 — Department of Education discrimination on the basis of sex in educational programs and activities. Instead, the Biden Administration has sought to trample women’s and girls’ athletic oppor- tunities and due process on campus, threaten free speech and religious liberty, and erode parental rights in elementary and secondary education regarding sensitive issues of sex. The new Administration should take the following steps: l Work with Congress to use the earliest available legislative vehicle to prohibit the department from using any appropriations or from otherwise enforcing any final regulations under Title IX promulgated by the department during the prior Administration. l Commence a new agency rulemaking process to rescind the current Administration’s Title IX regulations; restore the Title IX regulations promulgated by then-Secretary Betsy DeVos on May 19, 2020; and define “sex” under Title IX to mean only biological sex recognized at birth. l Work with Congress to amend Title IX to include due process requirements; define “sex” under Title IX to mean only biological sex recognized at birth; and strengthen protections for faith-based educational institutions, programs, and activities. The Trump Administration’s 2020 Title IX regulation protected the founda- tional right to due process for those who are accused of sexual misconduct. The Biden Administration’s proposed change to the interpretation of Title IX disposes of these rights. l The next Administration should move quickly to restore the rights of women and girls and restore due process protections for accused individuals. At the same time, there is no scientific or legal basis for redefining “sex” to “sexual orientation and gender identity” in Title IX. Such a change misrepresents the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Bostock, threatens the American system of federalism, removes important due process protections for students in higher education, and puts girls and women in danger of physical harm. Facilitating social gender transition without parental consent increases the likelihood that children will seek hormone treatments, such as puberty blockers, which are experimental medical interventions. Research has not demonstrated positive effects and long- term outcomes of these treatments, and the unintended side effects are still not fully understood.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Sen. Cruz, Ted

Illegal Red Snapper and Tuna Enforcement Act

119/s/283

Modernizing Access to Our Public Oceans Act

119/s/759

Protect College Sports Act of 2026

119/s/4668

Back to All Bills