31 State Attorneys General have signed an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the Havlish plaintiffs’ effort to recover $3.5 BILLION in Afghan central-bank assets—all in the name of “9/11 victims.” But were these 31 Attorneys General told who actually stands to receive the money? Because this is NOT a $3.5 billion recovery for “thousands of 9/11 victims.” Havlish represents just 47 9/11 decedents’ estates and their family members. Another major beneficiary would be multi-national corporate insurance plaintiffs. And were the 31 Attorneys General briefed about the so-called Havlish “Framework Agreement” that whacks up the $3.5 billion? The Ashton plaintiffs told the Second Circuit that the Joint Creditors had REFUSED TO DISCLOSE the terms of the Framework Agreement. According to Ashton’s understanding of those undisclosed terms: — approximately $1.8 BILLION would go to the 47 Havlish families and seven Doe plaintiffs; — approximately $600 MILLION would go to multi-national corporate insurance plaintiffs; — thousands of other 9/11 victims and families would divide what remains. The disparity is breathtaking. Ashton told the Second Circuit that the remaining 9/11 estates would receive only about 1% of what EACH of the 47 Havlish families would receive. Then there are the corporate insurers. These are not uncompensated human victims of terrorism—i.e., 9/11 dependent widows and children. After paying property claims arising from 9/11, insurers acquired subrogation rights and sued the Aviation Defendants to recover those payments. In 2010, insurers settled their aggregate subrogation claims against the Aviation Defendants for $1.2 BILLION. Yet the Havlish Framework would, according to Ashton, allocate approximately another $600 MILLION to the multi-national corporate insurance plaintiffs. And in 2022, attorneys for the Federal Insurance Creditors told the federal court that Havlish and the insurers had agreed to “pass on a substantial portion of any recovery to the broader 9/11 community.” They called the proposed distribution a “manifestly fair and equitable result.” Fair and equitable? If Ashton’s description is correct, the remaining 9/11 estates receive approximately 1% per estate of what EACH Havlish family receives, while corporate insurance plaintiffs receive approximately $600 million. And there is more. The Havlish plaintiffs are not an uncompensated group seeking their first recovery. Havlish judgment creditors have repeatedly pursued outside assets through major enforcement proceedings, including 650 Fifth Avenue and Clearstream—proceedings involving billions of dollars in assets and recoveries. So before 31 Attorneys General lend the authority of their offices to this effort in the name of “thousands of 9/11 victims,” they should do their homework and demand clear and fulsome answers from Havlish counsel: How much have the 47 Havlish estates already recovered in the USVSSTF and the 650 Fifth Avenue and Clearstream cases? Why does the Havlish Framework allocate another approximately $1.8 BILLION to this same small group and the seven Doe plaintiffs? Why would approximately $600 MILLION go to multi-national corporate insurance plaintiffs after insurers previously recovered through the $1.2 billion settlement with the Aviation Defendants? Was the Havlish Framework Agreement ever fully disclosed to the 31 Attorneys General before they signed this Supreme Court brief? Rather importantly, is there any hedge-fund, litigation-funder, assignee, “successor in interest,” or other third-party financial interest behind the Havlish claims that would stand to receive a substantial financial windfall if SCOTUS rules in Havlish’s favor? And how much of the recovery goes to Havlish counsel rather than the Havlish Plaintiffs? Do Havlish contingency-fee arrangements permit counsel to receive upward of 40% of recoveries? And do any third parties hold a financial interest in, or stand to benefit from, those attorneys’ fees? Most importantly: Is this really a recovery for “thousands of 9/11 victims”—or are thousands of 9/11 victims being invoked to help secure a recovery whose lion’s share goes somewhere else? Thousands of 9/11 widows, children, and other families have waited more than 25 years without receiving full and fair compensation for the horrific damages they suffered on the morning of September 11, 2001. They should not be used as rhetorical cover for a distribution agreement they have never even been allowed to see! After 25 years, enough with the use, abuse, and exploitation of “9/11 victims.” The 31 Attorneys General—and SCOTUS—deserve the complete facts. supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/2… @SCOTUSblog @AGIowa @AGSteveMarshall @AKAG_TregTaylor @AZAGMayes @AGTimGriffin @AGJamesUthmeier @ChrisCarr_Ga @Raul_Labrador @AGToddRokita @KSAGOffice @kyoag @AGLizMurrill @AGMaryland @LynnFitchAG @AGCHanaway @MTAGKnudsen @NEAttorneyGen @NH_DOJ @NMAttorneyGen @NCAGO @NDAGO @OhioAG @Okla_OAG @PAAttorneyGen @AGAlanWilson @SDAttorneyGen @AGTennessee @TXAG @AGDerekBrown @WestVirginiaAG @WYOAG . .