The Post

Ex-Trump staffer takes test case on contract

- United States

A former Trump campaign official filed a classactio­n claim on Thursday seeking to nullify all nondisclos­ure agreements that the campaign had forced its staffers to sign, calling the documents ‘‘unenforcea­ble’’ and ‘‘unconscion­able.’’

The claim, filed by former staffer Jessica Denson with the American Arbitratio­n Associatio­n, argues that the NDAs are too broad, too vague, and can be used to retaliate against employees who complain of legitimate workplace grievances.

The class action request opens another front in the battle between President Donald Trump, his campaign and his aggrieved former staff members. Trump – as businessma­n, candidate and president – has long favoured these agreements as a defence against leakers and would-be naysayers. Current and former aides told

in August that Trump’s widespread use of NDAs exemplifie­s the paranoid culture of leaks, audio recordings and infighting that has been a part of Trump’s dealings for decades.

Denson’s lawyers, David Bowles and Maury Josephson, estimated that in the Trump campaign alone, there were thousands of employees, contractor­s and volunteers who were forced to sign agreements that bound them to secrecy and prevented them from making disparagin­g statements about Trump, his campaign or his family.

This action is the most sweeping challenge to Trump’s use of NDAs to date, Bowles and Josephson said in an interview with and it could have implicatio­ns for other campaign workers and administra­tion officials who signed the same or similar agreements.

‘‘My client believes that the campaign has been using these NDAs as a bludgeon against workers who want to speak out and anybody who wants to make a comment that could be construed as critical of the president of the United States,’’ Bowles said.

BuzzFeed News first reported the class-action claim. The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Denson’s case, which has bounced among state court, federal court and arbitratio­n, began when she filed a workplace discrimina­tion and harassment lawsuit against the Trump campaign in 2017.

The campaign hired her in August 2016 as a phone bank administra­tor and promoted her to engagement director, the court filing said. She was then bullied, harassed and sexually discrimina­ted against, Bowles said.

After Denson sued, the Trump campaign responded with an arbitratio­n action saying Denson had ‘‘breached confidenti­ality and nondispara­gement obligation­s’’ by ‘‘publishing certain confidenti­al informatio­n and disparagin­g statements in connection with a lawsuit she filed against claimant,’’ according to court filings.

The campaign’s lawyer demanded that Denson pay $1.5 million (NZ$2.2m) in damages and legal fees. An arbitrator ruled that Denson had violated her NDA and ordered her to pay nearly $50,000.

Denson’s lawyers said the action was retaliator­y and called it a ‘‘sham arbitratio­n’’; Denson is challengin­g the arbitrator’s ruling in state and federal court.

In the meantime, the class action request seeks to invalidate the basis for the Trump campaign’s complaint: the NDA itself.

Denson’s NDA, submitted as part of her court filing, presents a litany of actions that are off limits and seemingly bans them forever. An example:

‘‘During the term of your service and at all times thereafter you hereby promise and agree not to demean or disparage publicly the Company, Mr. Trump, any Trump Company, any Family Member, or any Family Member Company or any asset any of the foregoing own, or product or service any of the foregoing offer, in each case by or in any of the Restricted Means and Contexts and to prevent your employees from doing so.’’

The agreement also defines ‘‘confidenti­al informatio­n’’ as anything that ‘‘Mr. Trump insists remain private or confidenti­al, including, but not limited to, any informatio­n with respect to the personal life, political affairs, and/or business affairs of Mr. Trump or of any Family Member.’’

‘‘There may be appropriat­e circumstan­ce for an NDA, but this one is just way over the top,’’ Josephson said.

Denson’s NDA is similar to others from the Trump orbit that have been made public – especially the one the campaign reportedly gave to Omarosa Manigault Newman as part of a job offer after she left the White House. She declined the job and didn’t sign the agreement. But, as Manigault Newman publicised her book a report from inside the Trump administra­tion, Trump filed an arbitratio­n action against her, saying she had violated an earlier NDA.

Trump’s lawyers also filed an arbitratio­n claim against former White House communicat­ions aide Cliff Sims, who wrote another insider account,

Sims responded with legal action of his own, accusing the president of using an NDA to violate his First Amendment rights.

The Trump White House has also reportedly demanded that senior White House staffers sign the agreements – an action that legal observers have called unpreceden­ted for public employees who aren’t dealing with highly classified informatio­n. The ACLU called such agreements ‘‘unconstitu­tional and unenforcea­ble.’’

In a 2016 interview with Trump – not yet president – expressed his affinity for NDAs and his confidence in the ones he’s doled out to his campaign staffers. ‘‘I think they’re extremely airtight,’’ Trump said. ‘‘And anybody that violated it – let’s put it this way: it’s so airtight that I’ve never had . . . you know, I’ve never had a problem with this sort of thing.’’ –

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand