A federal judge ruled Tuesday that a non-disclosure agreement signed by an employee of former President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign was unenforceable.
U.S. District Court Judge Paul Gardephe, a former President George W. Bush appointee, ruled the NDA was invalid under New York contract law because the wording was so vague, Politico reported.
The judge did not address constitutional issues presented by such agreements in the context of political campaigns.
"As to the scope of the provision, it is — as a practical matter — unlimited," Gardephe wrote. "Accordingly, Campaign employees are not free to speak about anything concerning the Campaign.
"The non-disclosure provision is thus much broader than what the Campaign asserts is necessary to protect its legitimate interests, and, therefore, is not reasonable."
The judge, in his 36-page decision, also said a non-disparagement clause in the agreement was flawed.
"The Campaign's past efforts to enforce the non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions demonstrate that it is not operating in good faith to protect what it has identified as legitimate interests," Gardephe wrote. "The evidence before the Court instead demonstrates that the Campaign has repeatedly sought to enforce the non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions to suppress speech that it finds detrimental to its interests."
Jessica Denson, a Hispanic outreach director for Trump in 2016, sued over the NDA. She also accused the campaign of sex discrimination in a separate lawsuit.
The campaign had persuaded an arbitrator to issue a $50,000 award against Denson for violating the agreement at one point. That award later was overturned.
Denson lauded Gardephe's decision, and said it shot down a tactic Trump has used to control his image.
"I'm overjoyed," Denson told POLITICO. "This president, former president, spent all four years aspiring to autocracy while claiming that he was champion of freedom and free speech. There’s many people out there who have seen cases like mine and were terrified to speak out."
Trump's attorneys were examining their options following Gardephe’s ruling, according to an adviser to the former president.
"We believe the court reached the wrong decision and President Trump’s lawyers are examining all potential appeals," the adviser said.
The Trump campaign asked Gardephe to edit the provisions he found unenforceable, but the judge declined.
Although Gardephe’s decision applied only to Denson, her attorneys said they thought the ruling affected all the NDAs the Trump campaign issued.
Trump has required secrecy agreements of his personal employees and staff in his companies for years. Those documents apparently were the mode for NDAs used in his 2016 presidential campaign.
The former president and his lawyers continued to use such agreements after Trump took office. First Amendment advocates protested that it was unconstitutional to demand public employees to swear an oath of secrecy.
Exactly which White House staffers were required to sign such agreements remains unclear.
Last year, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, a former volunteer adviser to first lady Melania Trump, over a tell-all book Winston Wolkoff wrote. Legal experts questioned the basis for the suit, which was based on a signed NDA.
The Justice Department dropped the case soon after President Joe Biden was inaugurated.
According to Denson, NDA agreements helped smother criticism of Trump during his presidential race and his time in office.
"Just the terms of the NDA were wildly restricting and it completely stifled public debate, truthful public debate about the Trump campaign and presidency, so this is a massive victory," she said. "NDAs like this are part of the reason why we ended up with a Donald Trump candidacy and presidency in the first place."
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.