The Trump administration has put forth a proposal to implement a new, government-wide nondisclosure agreement (NDA) for both new and existing federal employees. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) stated in a proposed rule, slated for publication in the Federal Register, that recent leaks concerning immigration enforcement and a U.S. raid in Venezuela highlight the necessity of such agreements. OPM asserts that these disclosures have endangered federal agents and members of the armed forces.
The proposal does not explicitly mention high-profile leaks, such as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's revelation of plans for a military strike on Yemen. However, it aims to standardize the process by which federal workers acknowledge their existing obligations to safeguard sensitive information. The roughly 2 million federal employees are already bound by rules to protect confidential and proprietary data acquired during their work.
OPM maintains that the proposed NDA does not introduce new restrictions on employee speech or disclosure rights. Instead, it is intended to provide a uniform method for employees to confirm their understanding and acceptance of current information-handling requirements. However, some individuals with experience in federal government operations disagree with this characterization.
Ray Limon, a former federal attorney and human resources leader with nearly three decades of service, described the proposal as a "new add-on that seems to be very, very broad in nature." He added, "I'm just adding this to another tranche of measures that they're taking to step on the throat of the employee." OPM did not immediately respond to NPR's questions regarding the proposed rule.
NDAs are already in use selectively throughout the federal government, particularly in areas involving national security, and are widespread in the private sector. However, the vast majority of civil servants, who handle routine, unclassified work, do not sign NDAs, according to Limon. Despite this, they are still subject to numerous restrictions on how they handle agency information.
According to the draft rule, agencies would have the discretion to decide whether to implement the new agreements. Nevertheless, a government-wide mandate for NDAs would represent an unprecedented shift. Limon noted, "It would be a big deal, absolutely. It's been very, very limited in how they've been used."
The draft rule specifies that the NDA would encompass information related to internal agency operations, personnel matters, procurement processes, or any sensitive, pre-decisional, or deliberative material not currently publicly available and not intended for disclosure under applicable law.
Limon expressed concern that such broad language could deter federal employees from making lawful disclosures under the Whistle Protection Act. This act safeguards federal employees from retaliation when they report government wrongdoing, including fraud, waste, or abuse.
While OPM states in the draft rule that federal employees will retain their right to make whistleblower disclosures, Limon remains skeptical. "I just think it's going to create a lot more confusion than necessary," he commented.
The administration has opened a public comment period on the draft rule, seeking input on various questions. These include the appropriate actions the government should take against employees, both new and existing, who refuse to sign an NDA.
In a separate draft rule proposed last year, OPM suggested that failure to sign an NDA could lead to termination or debarment from future federal employment.
