Trump Administration Plans Broad 'Gag Order' for Federal Employees
Translated from Chinese and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.
At a glance
- The Trump administration plans to implement a government-wide non-disclosure agreement (NDA) to prevent federal employees from sharing "confidential government information."
- The draft proposal broadly defines privileged information beyond typical classified and unclassified data, including "non-public, proprietary information" and "sensitive, pre-decisional or deliberative material."
- Critics argue the broad "gag order" violates the First Amendment, hindering public understanding of government operations and accountability.
The Trump administration is preparing to expand a "gag order" on federal employees, aiming to prevent the leakage of decision-making information. A draft notification from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) proposes implementing a government-wide non-disclosure agreement (NDA) that would prohibit federal employees from sharing a wide range of "confidential government information."
The draft, set for public comment, defines "privileged information" broadly, extending beyond standard classified and unclassified categories. It would bar employees from disclosing "non-public, proprietary information" or "sensitive, pre-decisional or deliberative material" not yet publicly available. Agencies would have discretion in adopting the NDAs.
This would arm the public with knowledge of how the government operates, and hinder informed debate that is crucial for democratic accountability.
The OPM notification cites high-profile leaks, including alleged unauthorized disclosures to The New York Times and The Washington Post regarding a January operation in Venezuela. The notice claims these leaks endangered military personnel, prompting news organizations to delay reporting to avoid jeopardizing U.S. forces. However, The New York Times' executive editor previously denied possessing mission-sensitive details or delaying reports at the government's request.
Critics, including the ACLU, contend that such broad NDAs infringe upon the First Amendment. They argue these measures would prevent the public from understanding government operations and stifle informed debate, which is crucial for democratic accountability. The ACLU stated that governments cannot shroud themselves in secrecy in a democracy.
However, contrary to some accounts, The New York Times did not possess verified details of the impending arrest of Nicolรกs Maduro, nor did we have a story ready to publish, nor did we delay publication at the request of the Trump administration.
Originally published by Liberty Times in Chinese. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.