President Donald Trump speaks at the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) dinner at the National Building Museum in Washington, Tuesday, April 8, 2025. (Pool via AP)
WASHINGTON (AP) – The Trump administration wants all current and future federal employees to sign non-disclosure agreements, part of a continuing crackdown on leaks to the media.
A proposed notice, announced Tuesday on the Office of Personnel Management website, is expected to be officially published in the Federal Register on Wednesday, seeking comment on a draft NDA to be used by federal agencies for “both new and existing employees.”
“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, while expressly preserving the right to make disclosures authorized by law,” the notice said.
The proposed notice seeks comment on several questions, including whether the NDA should cover only unclassified information and what appropriate actions, if any, agencies should consider for new or current employees who choose not to sign the agreement.
The OPM noted “several recent instances” where internal agency communications related to rulemaking and policy development were disclosed without authorization. It also discussed specific instances in which federal employees at the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security disclosed information about planned immigration enforcement actions without authorization.
In one case, The New York Times and The Washington Post received unauthorized information on the U.S. raid on Venezuela this past January and delayed “publishing what they knew to avoid endangering U.S. troops,” the OPM request for comment said.
A Washington Post spokesperson declined to comment.
Charles Stadtlander, executive director of Media Relations and Communications for the Times, said in an email that the paper had extensive reporting on operations targeting Venezuela and preparations for land-based military operations. “Contrary to some claims, however, The Times did not have verified details about the pending operation to capture Maduro or a story prepared, nor did we withhold publication at the request of the Trump administration.”
Ferreting out leaks that the administration deems harmful to its messaging has been a priority across multiple agencies since President Donald Trump returned to the White House. As part of that crackdown, the FBI in January seized the electronic devices of a Washington Post reporter, a move that alarmed media organizations and advocates of press freedom.
One other notable incident occurred last year when dozens of reporters turned in their access badges at the Pentagon, rejecting new rules imposed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that would leave journalists vulnerable to expulsion if they sought to report on information — classified or otherwise — that had not been approved by Hegseth for release.
Michael L. Vogelsang Jr., an attorney at the Employment Law Group, said he has questions, among them: “What gap is an NDA supposed to fill that doesn’t already exist?”
He noted that statutes already exist regarding the leaking of classified and sensitive information. There’s also a law passed by Congress, he noted, that prohibits employers from implementing or enforcing an NDA.
He said: “So Congress has already said NDAs are a no-go. So how can OPM make a regulation that violates the law?”
The American Federation of Government Employees National President Everett Kelley said in a statement that OPM’s proposed rule is part of a continuing effort to silence federal employees.
“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.
Comments