Trump’s nondisclosure agreements for federal employees are authoritarian and unenforceable.
When we think about all the ways the Trump presidency has exploited the lines between the historically and constitutionally circumscribed role of the president and his businesses, it’s conflict-of-interest concerns that are most often implicated. There are the questions surrounding the Trump family businesses overseas, issues related to his continuous apparent violation of the foreign emoluments clause of the Constitution, the recent and incredibly troubling revelations around Jared Kushner’s family business interests in Qatar, and countless conflicts that we don’t even know about.
But in a column on Sunday, Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post pointed to perhaps the most pernicious conflation of business and government yet by the president. One year ago, Trump reportedly began a practice of requiring, as he had done in his campaign, some federal employees—such as senior White House staff—to sign private nondisclosure agreements. Violations of those agreements would supposedly result in “serious damages” and remain enforceable beyond Trump’s presidency. Once again, Trump’s norm-breaking provides us with yet another teachable civics moment, if for no other reason than to lament yet another of Trump’s autocratic innovations. While these agreements are almost certainly unenforceable—as Marcus notes, federal employees, unlike their private-sector equivalents, have First Amendment rights—they can still potentially do significant damage to the republic.
To the extent the president’s understanding of the law means anything here, he was interviewed by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa in April 2016 and asked by Costa, quite directly, whether he was “going to make employees of the federal government sign nondisclosure agreements.” Trump said:
Advertisement Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementI think they should. … 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,” I would say … I do have nondisclosure deals. That’s why you don’t read that.
Parsing Trump’s language through the contradictions and ignorance is never easy, but at the very least he appears to grasp that there’s a free speech component to this issue. What he doesn’t appear to appreciate in the slightest is that it’s not for sale to him. Here’s more from that exchange with Costa and Woodward:
Advertisement AdvertisementTrump: I don’t like people that take your money and then say bad things about you. OK, you know, they take your …
Costa:But it’s so different when you’re in the federal government.
Trump:It’s different, I agree. It’s different.
Costa: But you are recommending nondisclosure …
Trump: And I tell you this, I will have to think about it. I will have to think about it. That’s a different thing, that I’m running a private company and I’m paying people lots of money, and then they go out and …
Woodward:The taxpayers are paying the other people in the federal government.
Trump:Sure, sure. They don’t do a great job, and then you fire them, and they end up writing a book about you. So it’s different. But I will say that in the federal government it’s a different thing. So it’s something I would think about. But you know, I do right now—I have thousands and thousands of employees, many thousands, and every one of them has an agreement, has a … I call it a confidentiality …
Costa and Woodward are gently attempting to lead Trump to a democratic axiom most Americans take for granted—the taxpayers pay White House officials, not Trump. White House officials cannot, in their official capacity, contractually and legally pledge allegiance to anyone other than the taxpayers. Trump placates his interviewers with a dismissive “sure, sure” and immediately betrays his autocratic understanding of the relationship between executive branch employees and their chief executive by expressing his fear that an employee may “end up writing a book about you.” The speech of federal employees is already constrained, in some cases for obvious enough reasons—some information is classified, some information raises national security concerns, and so on. It is not constrained, however, by the president’s desire for personal privacy.
Advertisement AdvertisementThe essence of the conflicts-of-interest problems posed by the Trump presidency is that we citizens would like to know in advance whose interests are being represented when the president is executing laws, advocating policy, negotiating with foreign nations, or alternately pumping/trashing particular companies on Twitter. Is it us? Or is it the Trump Organization? The idea behind conflicts-of-interest laws is to obviate the need to confront the question at all, because discerning anyone’s intent is always difficult, much less discerning the intent of a president whose words change as easily as the weather.
Advertisement AdvertisementThe Marcus story affords a telling example of where the president comes down on this citizenry versus business quandary. By having his staff sign nondisclosure agreements with civil penalties—presumably via liquidated damages clauses—that survive his presidency, Trump is effectively rendering his staff’s oaths to “support and defend the Constitution” subordinate to a separately negotiated oath to Donald Trump in his personal capacity. His intent couldn’t be more clear: Federal employees are really Donald Trump employees.
Advertisement His intent couldn’t be more clear: Federal employees are really Donald Trump employees.These agreements are, in all likelihood, legally deficient in a fairly elementary way. Absent consideration (i.e., the thing received by contracting parties in exchange for their agreement to perform/remain silent/forego rights), any nondisclosure agreement would in all likelihood be deemed invalid. Any nondisclosure agreement entered into by a federal employee owing civil damages to any person, let alone the president, also begs the appalling question of what consideration those employees could possibly have received separate and apart from their salaries, which are statutorily prescribed and reported annually to Congress. If they did receive some benefit apart from their salaries—or if the job, and thus the salary, itself was contingent upon signing the agreement—it would be worth contemplating what laws such an arrangement might violate.
Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementThe far stronger likelihood is that consideration isn’t present here, rendering these alleged agreements little more than a bullying, speech-chilling, calculated bluff. Marcus cites a draft agreement that makes penalties payable to the federal government (as opposed to Trump personally), but it’s difficult to imagine how that bit of drafting slipperiness would matter, except to attempt to obfuscate that Trump is the real party to the agreement and federal employees are obligees. According to Marcus, some who were reluctant to sign ultimately did so because they figured they were unenforceable anyway. Barring some dark authoritarian turn in our other branches of government, these employees were absolutely correct about this last part.
These alleged nondisclosure agreements represent an attempt to purchase the free speech rights of federal employees for the sake of Trump’s personal protection, paid with only an empty, but perhaps effective, threat. To say such a threat cheapens the presidency grossly understates the constitutional repugnancy of these agreements. This effort reveals the president’s view of himself as an autocratic leader and of his place within the American system as being above it. It further demonstrates his blithering ignorance and disdain for even the simplest and purest of American concepts like free speech and public service.
Tweet Share Share Comment(责任编辑:资讯)
- Yoon, US Senate's armed service committee chief discuss alliance, N.K. threats
- The Swedish entrepreneur who founded Ikea, Ingvar Kamprad, dies at 91.
- Blinken stresses China's 'clear self
- South Korea, US agree to closely coordinate on inter
- Yoon, US Senate's armed service committee chief discuss alliance, N.K. threats
- South Korea beefs up drills amid escalating NK provocations
- Djokovic, Nadal close in on French Open blockbuster
- Little Girls in Pretty Boxes author on gymnastics’ toxic culture.
- Govt. expresses condolences over deaths of 4 ethnic Koreans in Atlanta shootings
- 科创筑梦树立远大志向 蓄势赋能培养科技人才
- Trump wants classified Russia memo released despite Justice Department objections.
- Sterling, Henderson set for MBEs
- US ready to be 'flexible' for 'balanced agreement' with North Korea
-
Recently I had a friend over to whom I offered to audition my DIY PC speaker system. The first thing ...[详细]
-
Girls play a maypole game on Kim Il Sung Square as part of festivities on the first day of the Lunar ...[详细]
-
Djokovic ready to face 'biggest rival' Nadal for 58th time
PARIS:Novak Djokovic said facing Rafael Nadal for the 58th time on Friday, with a place in the Frenc ...[详细] -
“爱在雅安,红动校园”全市无偿献血走进校园公益海报作品获奖名单公示
为宣扬无偿献血光荣理念,倡导更多的人加入无偿献血事业中来。由雅安市献血工作领导小组办公室、市文明办、市教育局以及雅安日报集团联合开展的“爱在雅安,红动校园”无偿献血知识宣传进校园活动,于2017年6月 ...[详细] -
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, right, attends a ceremony alongside his daughter, Ju-ae, to mark th ...[详细]
-
Krejcikova pays tribute to Novotna after French Open triumph
PARIS:French Open champion Barbora Krejcikova was at Jana Novotna's bedside as the 1998 Wimbledo ...[详细] -
如何深入贯彻落实环境保护工作要求,如何坚决打好“蓝天保卫战”,一直以来,市城管执法局采取多种措施,确保餐饮油烟污染治理显实效。措施一——主动出击抓摸排在环保督察工作开展之初,市城管执法局便高度重视餐饮 ...[详细]
-
Greta Thunberg arrives in Portugal on her way to climate talks
Following a three-week voyage across the Atlantic, climate activist Greta Thunberg has arrived in Li ...[详细] -
Black Friday GPU Buying Guide: November GPU Pricing Update
There's a lot to discuss in this month's GPU pricing update with some updates regarding Nvidia's upc ...[详细] -
Korea, US set NK nuclear, missile issue as priority for alliance
(From left) US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Foreign Minister C ...[详细]
Travel Back in Time and Uncover Old
Why Trump trying to fire Mueller might not help an obstruction case.
- Update your BIOS: Utilities from Top Motherboard Makers
- 我市发布重污染天气黄色预警 启动Ⅲ级应急响应措施
- This meme is here to tell you what you can say during sex that may not be just about sex
- “爱在雅安,红动校园”全市无偿献血走进校园公益海报作品获奖名单公示
- SCOTUS: The courts implementing Project 2025, without Trump.
- The Nunes memo has wrought a crisis for U.S. intelligence.
- Lewis, the internet