Shocking Power Grab Targets Abuse Victims’ Money

Lawmakers in New Hampshire have handed sweeping new powers over an abuse survivors’ fund to political appointees, igniting warnings that government overreach is undermining the rights of the most vulnerable and eroding public trust in the fair administration of justice.

Story Snapshot

• National compensation expert Deborah Greenspan has condemned New Hampshire’s new law giving the governor and attorney general direct authority over abuse settlements.
• Last-minute legislative changes move control from a neutral party to political offices, raising the specter of favoritism and eroding survivor trust.
• The $160 million settlement fund, originally designed as a trauma-informed alternative to litigation, now faces legal challenges and public controversy.
• Survivors, their advocates, and legal experts warn the change sets a dangerous precedent for political interference in victim compensation programs nationwide.

Political Power Shift in Survivor Compensation Raises Alarm

In June 2025, New Hampshire lawmakers enacted a controversial amendment that shifted oversight of the abuse survivors’ settlement fund from a neutral administrator to direct gubernatorial and attorney general control. This reversal was pushed through as a last-minute budget provision, bypassing the previous independent structure in favor of concentrated political authority. For over 1,300 survivors of the Sununu Youth Services Center scandal, the new law means their compensation—and the process meant to bring closure—now depends on the decisions of elected officials, not impartial experts. The move has drawn fierce criticism from both survivors and national authorities on victim compensation, who see it as an unprecedented intrusion of politics into what was intended to be a trauma-informed, survivor-centered process.

The changes come after years of revelations about systemic, state-enabled abuse at youth detention centers, with cover-ups and retaliation against whistleblowers stretching back to the 1960s. Over 300 staff members have faced accusations, and at least 11 were arrested in 2021 alone. Public outrage and investigative journalism forced legislative action, resulting in the 2022 creation of a $100 million fund—later increased to $160 million—to compensate survivors without forcing them into protracted court battles. The fund’s original hallmark was independence: an administrator appointed by the state Supreme Court, free from political influence, would oversee awards and ensure fairness. In a dramatic departure, the new law now allows the governor to appoint and remove the fund administrator and grants the attorney general veto power over settlements, raising immediate questions about impartiality and the integrity of the process.

National Experts Warn Against Political Interference in Victim Funds

Deborah Greenspan, a veteran of the 9/11 Victims’ Compensation Fund and a leading figure in national disaster and abuse settlement programs, has submitted a sworn affidavit condemning the New Hampshire law. Greenspan argues that shifting control to political offices dismantles the fund’s integrity, making survivors’ compensation subject to the whims and priorities of elected officials. She draws sharp contrasts with best practices seen in the 9/11 and Flint water crisis funds, where neutrality and trauma-informed administration were central to building public trust and achieving a measure of justice. Legal experts echo her concerns, warning that political control may deter survivors from participating, create delays or inconsistencies in compensation, and set a chilling precedent for future abuse settlements nationwide. Survivor advocates and attorneys contend that the law represents a retreat from accountability, putting vulnerable individuals at further risk of being sidelined or silenced by government interests.

The controversy strikes at the heart of American principles of limited government and checks on executive authority. By consolidating decision-making with the governor and attorney general, critics argue the state has undermined the very independence that should shield survivors from political pressure or public relations concerns. For those who have long distrusted government action on institutional abuse, the changes appear to confirm fears of government overreach and disregard for constitutional protections. The issue has provoked heated debate in New Hampshire, with some state officials defending the law as necessary for oversight and fiscal responsibility. However, for many, the question remains whether government should ever control the distribution of justice to those it has already failed to protect.

Ongoing Legal, Political, and Social Fallout

The legal battle is intensifying, with Greenspan’s affidavit now central to a class-action lawsuit challenging the constitutionality and fairness of the new fund structure. Court hearings are scheduled for later this year, and survivors face a difficult decision: accept settlements under the new, politicized process or continue litigation against the state. The expanded fund, now at $160 million, offers higher individual compensation and extended deadlines, but uncertainty surrounds whether awards will be consistent or influenced by shifting political winds. Meanwhile, the precedent set by New Hampshire could embolden other states to inject politics into victim compensation, eroding trust in state institutions and harming public confidence in the rule of law. The controversy serves as a stark warning about the risks of government overreach, reminding Americans of the need for vigilance in defending the independence of critical systems meant to protect the vulnerable and uphold justice.

Sources:

New Hampshire Sex Abuse Lawsuits – Lawsuit Information Center

YDC Podcast

9/11 Victims’ Fund Architect Slams New Hampshire Abuse Settlement Program – ABC News

New Hampshire Juvenile Detention Center Sexual Abuse – Levy Law

New Hampshire Juvenile Detention Center Sex Abuse Lawsuit – Lawsuit Information Center