Lead

The Trump administration on Tuesday proposed a measure that would allow federal agencies to require employees to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) aimed at preventing them from sharing confidential information with journalists. The draft form, released by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the US government's human resources office, is designed for use with both new and existing employees, according to reports from Reuters and other outlets.

Coverage comparison

The proposal was reported by multiple news organizations, including Reuters, Al Jazeera, and the South China Morning Post. While most reports framed the move as an effort to increase control over the flow of government information, Al Jazeera's coverage was more critical, describing the administration as "threatening" legal action and quoting a press freedom advocate who called the measure "absurd" and "dangerously secretive." The Jerusalem Post and the South China Morning Post adopted a more neutral tone, focusing on the procedural details of the OPM announcement.

Key claims

  • Agencies would have discretion: Each federal agency would decide whether to require employees to sign the NDA, according to the OPM statement as reported by multiple sources. The public will have 30 days to comment once the rule is published in the Federal Register.
  • Penalties for violations: Under the draft agreement, the administration could pursue civil and criminal penalties against employees who violate its terms, as reported by the Jerusalem Post and Reuters. Former employees would need "written permission from an authorized agency official" to speak to journalists about information deemed confidential, according to the draft text cited by both outlets.
  • Expanded definition of confidential: Al Jazeera reported that the proposal expands the definition of confidential beyond the intelligence community's traditional classifications. The NDA would cover information relating to internal agency operations, personnel matters, procurement processes, and "any sensitive, pre-decisional or deliberative material."
  • Royalties clause: The proposed form states that the US government would be entitled to all "royalties" employees receive from disclosing information that violates the agreement, according to Al Jazeera and Reuters. The meaning of this clause is unclear, and OPM did not immediately offer further explanation.
  • Rationale from OPM: OPM Director Scott Kupor defended the proposal, saying that "in much of the private sector, employees handling sensitive business or customer information are routinely required to sign confidentiality agreements, and the federal government should not be held to a lower standard." An OPM spokesperson, McLaurine Pinover, said the move is rooted in concerns that unauthorized disclosures are disrupting agency operations and eroding trust, as reported by Al Jazeera.

Perspectives

Critics, including Lauren Harper of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, argue that the NDA could deter whistleblowers and shield government misconduct from public scrutiny. They note that federal law already prohibits retaliation against workers who disclose fraud, abuse, or misconduct to internal watchdogs and Congress, but the NDA may create confusion about what employees can legally share. Supporters within the administration contend that the measure is necessary to protect sensitive information and align government practices with private-sector standards.

The proposal is part of a broader pattern of the Trump administration seeking to limit information flow, including banning certain news outlets from the Pentagon press room and cutting funding for public media, as Al Jazeera noted. However, the administration has framed these actions as efforts to ensure accountability and efficiency.

As of now, the rule is not yet in effect, and individual agencies must agree to implement it. The 30-day public comment period will follow official publication in the Federal Register, after which the OPM will consider feedback before finalizing the directive.