White House Senior Staff Made To Sign Lifetime Non-Disclosure Agreements
Join us and tell your reps how you feel!
What’s the story?
Like many high-powered and wealthy individuals, President Trump has frequently required the signing of non-disclosure agreements by staff and others with whom he had dealings. Now it seems he brought the practice to the White House, which may not be constitutional.
On Sunday, Washington Post Deputy Editorial Page Editor Ruth Marcus reported that she had obtained a draft of the non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) signed by senior White House staff in early 2017. The agreements had a variety of requirements, and threatened a $10 million dollar penalty if breached:
Each disclosure of "confidential" information (defined as any nonpublic information gleaned while working at the White House) shared with the press or any employee of federal, state or local governments would qualify for the assessment of damages.
Also, any "publication of works of fiction that contain any mention of the operations of the White House, federal agencies, foreign governments, or other entities interacting with the United States Government that is based on confidential information" would violate the agreement.
The agreement would stand during the signer’s service at the White House and "at all times thereafter".
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) made a statement in response to the report:
"Public employees can’t be gagged by private agreements. These so-called NDAs are unconstitutional and unenforceable."
The White House has not made a statement confirming the existence of the agreements, but President Trump did tell the Post in April 2016 that he thought they were a good idea.
"I think they should [sign NDAs]. . . . And I don’t know, there could be some kind of a law that you can’t do this. But when people are chosen by a man to go into government at high levels and then they leave government and they write a book about a man and say a lot of things that were really guarded and personal, I don’t like that. I mean, I’ll be honest. And people would say, oh, that’s terrible, you’re taking away his right to free speech. Well, he’s going in."
What do you think?
If White House staff did sign such an agreement, should the agreements be made public, even if they are unenforceable? If they are unconstitutional, should there be any penalties for the administration requiring them?
Tell us in the comments what you think, then use the Take Action button to tell your reps!
— Asha Sanaker
(Photo Credit: Wikimedia / Creative Commons)
The Latest
-
🌎 Are You Ready To Take Action Against Climate Change?Scientists claim that last year "smashed" the record for the hottest year by a large margin , offering a "dramatic testimony" of read more... Environment
-
Should U.S. Implement a New Tax on AI to Fund Worker Benefits?The debate As technology advances, artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more integrated into our society. While leaders in AI read more... Artificial Intelligence
-
SCOTUS Hears Arguments of Abortion Pill Mifepristone CaseUpdated March 27, 2024, 12:30 p.m. EST On Tuesday, March 26, the Supreme Court heard arguments about the mifepristone case, read more... Women's Health
-
IT: ⛑️ It's American Red Cross Giving Day, and... How will you give back today?Welcome to Wednesday, March 27th, philanthropists and entrepreneurs... It's American Red Cross Giving Day - a time to ensure the read more...