The ACLU thinks the answer is no. Ben Wizner, director of the Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement last year: “Public employees cannot be gagged by private agreements. These “NOAs” are unconstitutional and unenforceable. Asked if she signed a confidentiality agreement, press spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said, “I`m not going to come and go to find out who signed an NOA in the White House. “t.co/FvIXw1lAoF pic.twitter.com/jiY9A1J8w8 We could soon see if the courts agree. The Washington Post reported overnight that a former Trump campaign official filed “a group action Wednesday to end all confidentiality agreements that the campaign forced to sign their aides, calling the documents “non-opposable” and “unseracsable.” In the end, both legal challengers and congressional leaders reached a compromise with the George H.W. Bush administration on the use of SF 312. This agreement and all of these agreements would include a provision that all whistleblower laws replace them. Tom Devine – the legal director of the Government Accountability Project, who helped develop the compromise language in the early 1990s – told me that his group had essentially acquired a definition of classification that was not as broad as Reagan originally intended. “The information must be explicitly identified as `classified`… or must be for national security purposes,” Devine told me. You have the right to notice” that something is classified, he added. Even under Reagan`s definition, which was not respected and too broad, “classifiable” information would have something to do with national security, Devine said. “In principle, there was this restriction,” he told me.