trump would hardly be the first president to place restrictions on departing political appointees. | getty by marianne levine 10/18/16 01:15 pm edt donald trump has suggested that, if elected, he'd make political appointees sign a sweeping non-disclosure agreement similar to one that he requires campaign workers to sign . he may have some leeway to do so. story continued below interviews given and memoirs written by former cabinet members are a crucial source of information for presidential historians. former secretaries of state hillary clinton, madeleine albright, colin powell, condoleezza rice and henry kissinger have all written accounts of their time in the executive branch, along with former defense secretary robert gates and former treasury secretary timothy geithner, to name just a few. but trump doesn<u+2019>t approve. in a march interview with the washington post, trump was asked whether he'd make government employees sign confidentiality agreements. <u+201c>i think they should," he replied. trump conceded that "there could be some kind of a law that you can<u+2019>t do this," but then he continued: "when people are chosen by a man to go into government at high levels and then they leave government and they write a book about a man and say a lot of things that were really guarded and personal, i don<u+2019>t like that.<u+201d> post reporter bob woodward pointed out that government employees received their salaries not from the president but from the taxpayers. that prompted trump to agree that "in the federal government it's a different thing. so it's something i would think about. but you know, i do right now <u+2014> i have thousands and thousands of employees, many thousands, and every one of them has an agreement." could trump prevent his top appointees from disclosing whatever information he chose <u+2014> even after they left the government? <u+201c>trump could likely fashion something like [that] in the white house.<u+201d> said norman eisen, special counsel to president barack obama in 2009-11. <u+201c>it would be unusual," eisen explained, "to expand non-disclosure to extend outside the typical area of classified and sensitive information," but "he could try to do it by an executive order requiring his appointees to sign a written pledge not to disclose.<u+201d> <u+201c>it is a troubling prospect," eisen said, "one of many presented by a trump presidency." the confidentiality agreement trump uses in his campaign is extremely wide in scope, protecting no fewer than four generations of the trump family. its definition of confidential information includes taxes, financial statements, contracts, schedules, appointments, meetings, conversations and notes of <u+201c>mr. trump, any family member, any trump company or any family member company.<u+201d> the term "family member<u+201d> is defined to include trump<u+2019>s children and <u+201c>their respective spouses, children and grandchildren, if any, and mr. trump<u+2019>s siblings and their respective spouses and children, if any.<u+201d> the campaign confidentiality agreement also requires that employees and volunteers <u+201c>during the term of [their] service and at all times thereafter<u+201d> agree not to "disparage publicly" trump, any trump company, any trump family member or any trump family member's business enterprise. trump would hardly be the first president to place restrictions on departing political appointees. on his first day in office, president barack obama issued an executive order that prohibited his appointees from lobbying their former agency until two years after their departure. bill clinton issued a similar order prohibiting his appointees from lobbying former colleagues for five years, though he revoked it one month before he left office. in both instances, the purpose of the restrictions was to make government employees behave more ethically. on monday, trump said that he would reinstate clinton<u+2019>s order and <u+201c>ask congress to pass this ban into law so that it cannot be lifted by executive order.<u+201d> in addition, trump said he would <u+201c>issue a lifetime ban against senior executive branch officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government.<u+201d> the legality of post-employment restrictions is hard to gauge, because no ex-official has ever challenged them in court. former top administration appointees typically earn their livelihoods based largely on their political connections. it would therefore be perverse for them to take any action that would sever those connections, especially in so public a forum as a lawsuit. even so, an executive order that imposed confidentiality and non-disparagement requirements would carry post-employment restrictions well beyond any perceived public interest. its purpose would be to protect the personal interest of trump himself. adam samaha, a constitutional law professor at new york university, said that such an order would be extremely vulnerable to court challenge. <u+201c>i do think the president has executive authority to issue an order to control the flow of information from the president<u+2019>s advisers,<u+201d> samaha said. <u+201c>but if you write a very broad anti-disclosure provision you have the risk of a judge finding part of the policy unconstitutional.<u+201d> in addition, samaha said, certain provisions in trump<u+2019>s campaign contract, if applied to government employees, would prohibit the disclosure of official misconduct and law breaking, creating another constitutional problem. richard painter, chief ethics lawyer to president george w. bush in 2005-07, said that as president trump would enjoy very broad latitude to require non-disclosure from top aides. <u+201c>he can order them to do what he wants them to do," painter said, "and fire them if they don<u+2019>t, but that<u+2019>s been true anyway." the only real restriction, he said, would be that a non-disclosure agreement couldn't violate existing laws like the freedom of information act. but painter said trump could not act to enforce non-disclosure agreements as president the way he can as a private citizen. samaha agreed. <u+201c>i just doubt the president<u+2019>s lawyers would craft the policy this way," samaha said, "unless the idea is to send a message, even if it<u+2019>s legally unenforceable." eisen is less sanguine. the federal government may lack the power to make a non-disclosure agreement stick, he said, but it still has the power to try. on his way to courtroom defeat, a president trump could run up legal costs for any ex-government appointee who aspired to speak freely of his time in office. <u+201c>the attorney general could be ordered to enforce this,<u+201d> eisen said. <u+201c>that threat would have a tremendous chilling effect. the ordinary person is going to be afraid to take on the full weight of the u.s. government.<u+201d> by michael grunwald by bill scher by thomas wright by joshua zeitz
could president trump muzzle government workers? - politico
marianne levine michael grunwald