Trump Administration Proposes Agreements to Silence Leaks by Government Workers
The Trump administration is planning a requirement that federal employees sign non-disclosure agreements as a condition of continued employment.
A draft notice from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management about the non-disclosure agreement forms was published last week by the Federal Register.
The notice says that the “form is intended to document Federal employees’ acknowledgment of, and agreement to comply with, current legal obligations to safeguard non-public, confidential, or proprietary information, created or obtained through their official duties…”
Critics from among civil rights groups argue that the non-disclosure agreements (NDA) could chill government transparency.
The proposal is part of a wider push to tighten control over leaks following high-profile disclosures to the media. It also continues President Donald Trump’s widespread use of NDAs throughout his business empire and government leadership.
Multiple news stories in the past two years revealed internal disagreements over military and foreign-policy decisions, such as whether to strike the Houthis in Yemen after they fired on commercial ships in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. The stories embarrassed the Trump administration by exposing internal divisions not intended for the public.
In another case, Trump was angered by premature media reports about a secret U.S. operation in Venezuela that led to the arrest of former President Nicolas Maduro in January.
The Federal Register notice mentions information leaked to The New York Times and The Washington Post while saying the leaks “put the lives of members of the armed forces at risk…”
Labor unions and government watchdog groups are raising concerns that the agreements could discourage employees from reporting evidence of misconduct that might be demanded of them by Congress or inspectors general.
They also say non-disclosure agreements could be unnecessary and redundant.
Government clearances already prohibit leaking sensitive information, such as under Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement (SF-312). It is the standard federal agreement acknowledging that classified information cannot be disclosed without authorization.
There also are agency specific secrecy agreements for sensitive programs, such as intelligence or military operations.
Violations of the agreements can lead to loss of clearance, job termination, civil penalties or criminal prosecution under laws such as the Espionage Act.
The Trump administration’s proposed NDA adds additional language against sharing information on “any sensitive, pre-decisional or deliberative material that is not currently publicly available…”
The draft NDA said signing the form is “voluntary” but adds that a refusal comes with consequences.
“Failure to sign may result in removal from federal service and potential debarment for refusal to certify compliance with applicable non-disclosure obligations,” the notice says.
Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said the proposal was too broad.
“This proposed NDA is another attempt by the administration to purge the civil service of nonpartisan career employees and replace them with loyalists who won’t speak out against waste, fraud, and abuse,” Kelley said. “Federal employees do not surrender their First Amendment rights when they accept federal employment, and the public has a right to know about this administration’s abuses.”
Michael Fallings, managing partner at the federal employment law firm Tully Rinckey, predicted the NDA could lead to court action if it is implemented after the 30-day comment period.
“If people are removed from their jobs for violating or allegedly violating this NDA, it will certainly lead to litigation,” Fallings said.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Vice President Vance Asks States to Join Anti-Fraud Campaign
Vice President J.D. Vance made a pitch to state attorneys general last week at the White House to help with a federal anti-fraud effort.
He told them that widespread fraud in programs such as Medicaid, hospice care and student loans was reducing the effectiveness of taxpayer funds while robbing needy people of the assistance they need.
“These are not victimless crimes,” Vance told 15 Republican state attorneys general.
Vance is leading the Trump administration’s White House Task Force to Eliminate Fraud that began operating in March. Since then, its leaders claim to have uncovered 450 major cases of fraud that are being prepared for prosecution.
Vance singled out Minnesota and California as having some of the worst cases.
Federal prosecutors last month announced charges against 15 people in Minnesota accused of orchestrating roughly $90 million in Medicaid and social services fraud schemes.
A separate case tied to the “Feeding Our Future” scandal resulted in a nearly 42-year prison sentence for a nonprofit leader convicted in a $250 million pandemic food aid fraud.
Vance said that for decades taxpayers have expected their money to be used to help disadvantaged persons but that in many cases, “It’s not going there. It’s going to fraudsters.”
The federal government’s strategy so far has tried to coordinate oversight across all agencies, rather than leaving each to independently monitor fraud. Vance called it “a whole of government approach.”
Now he wants to more directly recruit state assistance.
Andrew N. Ferguson, vice chair of the Task Force to Eliminate Fraud, told the attorneys general, “We must restore deterrence by finding, prosecuting and punishing fraudsters.”
He added, “This is where you come in. The federal government wants to partner with all of you to combat this fraud.”
Much of the new anti-fraud campaign can be traced to a conservative influencer who demonstrated in a viral video last December that numerous day care centers in Minnesota were misusing public funds.
Some of them received millions of dollars for child care assistance but when he went to their offices, some of them were empty or inactive while still receiving federal grants. Many of the facilities were operated by Somali immigrants.
The Department of Health and Human Services responded by freezing hundreds of millions of dollars in child care funding for the state while investigations were pending.
Further Justice Department investigations found similar fraud with Medicaid and student loans.
Stephen Miller, the Trump administration’s deputy chief of staff for policy, told the attorneys general, “Everything we found either confirms our worst fears or exceeds them.”
The Task Force to Eliminate Fraud is trying to build “protections” into the program that eliminates the honor system its members blame for some of the problems. In one example, the Trump administration is expanding use of artificial intelligence to detect improper Medicare and Medicaid payments.
In addition, a new assistant attorney general role has been added to the Justice Department to investigate fraud allegations. The new Fraud Division has executed at least 22 search warrants against Minnesota day care centers.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Joe Biden Sues to Prevent Release of Audiotapes from His Memoir
Former President Joe Biden filed a lawsuit last week against the Justice Department seeking a court order to block the public release of audio recordings and transcripts from interviews he conducted with his ghostwriter in 2016 and 2017.
He’s claiming privacy rights but the dispute also continues a political battle over his retention of classified documents that became the subject of a special counsel investigation.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., argues the planned disclosure would be an “unwarranted invasion” of Biden’s privacy and violate Justice Department policies protecting sensitive law enforcement materials.
Biden’s attorneys said the 70 hours of recordings were made during private 2016 and 2017 conversations with writer Mark Zwonitzer at Biden’s home as he worked on his memoir, “Promise Me, Dad: A Year of Hope, Hardship, and Purpose.”
"Every American, including a sitting or former Vice President, has a right to privacy in the personal conversations he has within his own home," Biden’s lawsuit says. "And when the U.S. Department of Justice obtains that private information through a criminal investigation, the Department bears a particular responsibility to protect it from disclosure."
The Justice Department intends to release the material by June 15 to the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee and the conservative Heritage Foundation, which had sought the files through Freedom of Information Act litigation.
The recordings were a focal point during former special counsel Robert Hur’s investigation into Biden’s handling of classified documents retained after his vice presidency.
The Heritage Foundation and congressional Republicans say the audio files are important to ensure government transparency and to verify the thoroughness of the special counsel's work.
Hur ultimately declined to recommend criminal charges, but his 345-page report released in February 2024 drew national attention for describing Biden as a "well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."
Hur initially was criticized by Democrats for the implications that the president demonstrated cognitive decline. He was largely vindicated during the 2024 presidential campaign, when Biden stumbled over his words and seemed forgetful in a debate with Donald Trump.
Biden’s lawsuit says the Justice Department previously agreed the files were exempt from disclosure but added that the government reversed its policy under political pressure from Trump.
The Justice Department gave "no formal explanation for its about-face," the lawsuit says.
The lawsuit claims congressional Republicans are trying to circumvent federal disclosure protections for privacy rights.
Republicans argue the recordings are a matter of public interest about a major federal investigation and questions surrounding Biden’s mental sharpness while he was president.
They say further evidence can be found in the release of transcripts from Biden’s interview with Hur, which showed moments where the former president struggled to recall dates and details.
Former Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Hur as special counsel in January 2023 to investigate unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents by Biden while he was vice president in the Obama administration.
The investigation started after Biden’s personal attorneys were packing up files at his former private office in Washington, D.C.. They discovered a small batch of classified documents in a locked closet that they turned over to the National Archives.
A subsequent Justice Department investigation revealed additional classified materials and handwritten notebooks at Biden's personal residences in Wilmington and Rehoboth Beach, Delaware. It included sensitive intelligence files and national security materials.
Hur concluded that Biden "willfully retained and disclosed classified materials" after his vice presidency while a private citizen. His cooperation in the investigation and apparent cognitive decline indicated that criminal charges would be inappropriate, Hur said.
Republicans say they are concerned similar national security lapses could be revealed by the audio tapes set for public release June 15.
Trump responded to Biden’s lawsuit on Truth Social by calling him “a crooked politician.”
The case is Joseph R. Biden, Jr. v. U.S. Department of Justice, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Waymo Confronts Legal Challenges While Planning Self-Driving D.C. Taxis
Ride-hailing service Waymo is steadily advancing plans to bring self-driving taxi service to the Washington region despite a growing legal and political fight over safety, liability and government regulation.
Waymo confirms that its vehicles are operating in Arlington and Alexandria to map streets in preparation for a possible launch in Northern Virginia.
So far, the cars are being driven by human operators. No commercial rollout date has been finalized.
The move into Northern Virginia follows more than a year of testing in Washington, where Waymo has operated vehicles with safety drivers while lobbying lawmakers to legalize fully driverless service.
Virginia law does not now allow fully autonomous ride-hailing services without a human operator. However, state lawmakers are considering legislation that would create a licensing system for self-driving passenger vehicles.
Officials involved in the discussions have said such a system may not be operational until at least 2028.
In the District, Waymo’s expansion has stalled amid disputes over regulation. The D.C. Council approved a testing framework for autonomous vehicles in 2020, but lawmakers required the District Department of Transportation to complete a safety study and draft recommendations before commercial deployment could be authorized.
The report was due in 2022 and still has not been completed.
Councilmember Charles Allen introduced legislation last month that would establish permits and fees for robotaxi operators and create a formal pathway for companies such as Waymo to operate without human drivers in Washington. Supporters argue the city risks falling behind other metropolitan areas that already permit autonomous ride services.
The legal controversies surrounding the technology are widening across the region.
Consumer advocates and trial lawyers have raised concerns over who would be legally responsible if a self-driving vehicle causes a crash involving pedestrians, bicyclists or passengers.
A bill debated this year in Maryland drew criticism because opponents argued it failed to clearly identify who could be sued for an autonomous vehicle accident.
Questions over federal versus local authority are also emerging. Some industry advocates argue Congress or the U.S. Department of Transportation could eventually attempt to override restrictive local rules in Washington if the District continues delaying approval of robotaxi services.
Labor groups and some local officials have additionally warned that large-scale robotaxi deployment could threaten taxi, rideshare and delivery-driving jobs.
Similar political opposition has surfaced in Maryland and other states where autonomous vehicle expansion has slowed amid protests from labor unions and public transit advocates.
Waymo also faces broader national scrutiny over safety.
Federal regulators have examined incidents involving autonomous vehicles, including software recalls tied to flooded-road behavior and investigations into school-bus passing incidents in other states. Those cases have become central talking points for critics who argue Washington-area regulators should move cautiously before permitting widespread driverless operations.
A Waymo foothold in the nation’s capital region would give the company greater visibility with federal policymakers who are debating nationwide autonomous vehicle standards.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
D.C. Judges Rule Sports Venues Must Reveal Financial Data for FOIA Requests
Two D.C. Superior Court judges ruled in separate cases last week that the Washington Convention and Sports Authority is an agency of the District for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act.
The ruling removes a veil of secrecy that has shielded the earnings, salaries and expenses of the Washington region’s professional sports teams for decades.
The ruling results from a lawsuit filed by the parent company of the local news outlet District Dig after the Convention and Sports Authority, more commonly called Events DC, denied a 2025 FOIA request. The request sought communications involving NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, Washington Commanders owner Josh Harris, and consultants regarding the multibillion-dollar RFK Stadium redevelopment deal.
Events DC argued it was an independent entity with a "separate legal existence" from local government and thereby exempt from public records laws.
Superior Court Judge Katherin E. Oler disagreed, saying independent public bodies in the District cannot use their semi-autonomous status to shield their operations from press and public scrutiny.
She said the business status of the organization must be determined by looking at how it functions. In the case of Events DC, it performs public services, uses public land, answers to a public appointment process, and maintains deep financial ties to the District government, Oler said.
As a result, it is “an agency of the District,” she wrote.
Days later, Superior Court Judge Darlene Soltys adopted Oler’s reasoning to advance a parallel FOIA lawsuit brought by a sports business reporter. The reporter, Brandon Thurston, sought records on what he suspected were hidden government subsidies to World Wrestling Entertainment in exchange for hosting high-profile spectacles in the District, including superstar John Cena’s retirement match.
The rulings also allow public scrutiny of local convention and entertainment management documents for venues such as the D.C. Armory and the Entertainment and Sports Arena.
The result would mean one of the city's largest, most financially influential entities must now report its operations and finances to journalists or anyone else who files a FOIA request.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.