When promises to veterans are broken, America loses

Wes Martin, a retired U.S. Army colonel and combat veteran, co-authored, with 8th Sergeant Major of the Army Julius Gates, “Earn It, Life. Times and Leadership.”

Betrayal is the willful slaughter of trust. This is the foundation of the lawsuit now filed as Museum of Americans in Wartime v. Cecil & Irene Hylton Foundation Inc. in Virginia Circuit Court, Prince William County.

What started out by both parties as a major endeavor to honor America’s warriors has developed into a legal conflict. That is why the allegations surrounding the Cecil and Irene Hylton Foundation and its dealings with the National Museum of Americans in Wartime should concern every American — especially those who claim to support our veterans.

According to a lawsuit filed by the museum, the Hylton Foundation publicly and unconditionally pledged 67 acres of land in Prince William County, Va., to serve as the permanent home of a $100-million national museum honoring American veterans. This was no small undertaking. The site — along the historic Interstate 95 Corridor of Military History — was to house immersive re-creations of World War I trenches, battle-scarred European villages, and exhibits designed to tell the unvarnished truth of America’s wars and the men and women who fought them.

The museum’s mission was clear: to preserve the stories of loyalty, courage, duty and sacrifice that define our armed forces — stories too easily distorted or forgotten.

The museum wasn’t a paper organization. It would hold more than 80 historic tanks and military vehicles, including a 1942 Ford-manufactured Jeep and a Stuart M5A1 tank. It has collected more than 900 oral histories from veterans of every major American conflict from World War II to the present. It secured commitments from more than 20,000 individual donors and substantial backing from the Commonwealth of Virginia and Prince William County, building a war chest of roughly $22-million in public and philanthropic support.

That momentum, the lawsuit alleges, is now stalled. The museum contends that the Hylton Foundation used its 2012 land pledge to obtain rezoning and regulatory variances — changes that allegedly increased the value of Hylton family properties, only to later change the terms of what had been described publicly as an unconditional donation. After the death of Cecil “Donnie” Hylton III in 2017, leadership of the foundation passed to his cousin, Conrad Hylton. According to the complaint, the foundation then introduced new conditions, milestones, and shifting requirements that made it nearly impossible for the museum to move forward.

Per the court filing, the foundation allegedly began questioning the museum’s financial capacity, disparaging its operations, and — most troubling — terminating negotiations altogether. In early 2025, the foundation reportedly demanded ownership of all site plans and engineering work, without compensation, asserting sole control over the property. If these allegations are true, this is not merely a contract dispute. It is a moral failure.

The museum is now asking the court to enforce what it says was a binding agreement under Virginia law: either the transfer of the 67 acres and site funding, or monetary damages of at least $50-million, along with an injunction to prevent further alterations to the property. It is also seeking restitution for benefits allegedly unjustly retained by the foundation.

There is no doubt the Museum of Americans in Wartime is dedicated to preserving the history of our nation’s warriors. The work already completed in a very interactive park recognizes the commitment, experiences and sacrifices of America’s fighting forces of the past century. Unfortunately, this court case exposes another reality: There are sectors within American society that renders honor and recognition only when it is convenient to do so and when it does not interfere with personal ambitions.

Hopefully, the case will come down to the original documented agreement and not one party expecting to outspend and bankrupt the other in legal maneuvering. Written agreements and contracts are structural foundations that require trust and cooperation to build institutions. Breaches of trust and cooperation result in years of effort and investment being destroyed.

In this case, the Museum of Americans in Wartime is the plaintiff. No matter how the case is settled in court, the ultimate victims are the American veterans who have served in harm’s way. They too signed a contract. Those who were drafted didn’t have a choice. They answered the Battle Cry of Freedom and many paid the ultimate sacrifice.

As a combat veteran, I am sometimes asked why warriors fight. “Is it the nation, the Constitution, or the flag?” My response is always the same, “We serve the nation, we defend the Constitution, we rally to the flag, and we fight for the ones on our left and right.

This is the recognition the Museum of Americans in Wartime is trying to share with today’s citizens of our nation and the world. It is a shame the museum is having to fight a legal battle, trying to rescue the mass funding already spent to protect, and further develop for generations to come, the legacy of the American warrior.

Just as American warriors honored their pledge, all parties involved in this case need to do the same.