Could a judge legally void the Trump employee "confidentiality agreements"?

[Ken Burch]

If so, someone should file a motion to make that happen.

[Foggyhill]

1. If he has done something criminal

It probably would be void anyway

Guessing some of those people don't want to implicate themselves or don't want the attention

[Stallion]

6. Or If There Is a Civil Lawsuit Especially if Filed by Trump or If He Uses Privileged Material

can't use evidence as both a Shield to protect yourself and as a Sword against your opponent

for example the Attorney Client Privilege is waived if there is a malpractice lawsuit filed by a client

basically if the privileged matter becomes an issue in the case, privilege is usually waived although it would still probably remain under seal to outsiders. Evidence and testimony would be filed/taken under seal

[jberryhill]

2. Unlikely

The right to contract is also a Constitutionally protected right.

Furthermore, I would guarantee you that these agreements are also subject to binding private arbitration, and the only thing a court would do is (a) recognize the arbitration result and (b) issue a judgment, in the event of failure to comply with the arbitration order.

As far as "someone should file a motion", that would only have any meaning in the context of a suit over the validity of the contract itself, filed by the person seeking to get out of it (or in an action for breach after the fact).

If, as I also suspect, the clauses are subject to liquidated damages (i.e. a stated monetary sum for breach), then the only relevant question is "how much is needed to pay up".

ON THE OTHER HAND, it appears that Trump, like many people, confuse what can be done legally with what is advantageous politically. Like his impotent legal threats against the NYT and People Magazine, these are situations where the defense attorney can essentially say "bring it on" in many instances.

It's easy to ask others to be martyrs for one's cause. It's somewhat different from the perspective of the proposed martyr.

[Foggyhill]

3. If doubt they could enforce anything if he broke the

Law and someone said so
Off course, there would be a court case before that is settled

I think not wanting the attention or scrutiny is why most wouldn't. Not everyone wants their lives to become living hells (even without the whole legal aspect)

[stopbush]

4. Any contractual agreement that sanctions illegal activity is considered to be null.

If Trump tries to use a NDA to keep criminal activity coming to light, that agreement would be null. Any employee covered by a NDA can report illegal activity without fear of penalty.

[rdking647]

9. a 20 or 30 year old contract might not

arbitration wasnt as common 20 or 30 years ago

[okaawhatever]

10. I would LMAO if several former employees violated the agreement and let Americans know how evil the

man is. Let Trump take them to court and get a judgement. When it's time to collect, they could file bankruptcy on his azz the way he has done so many others. (granted, it would take someone without many assets).

After the BK is discharged they can write a book and we'll all buy a copy to make them whole again.

I know, wishful thinking, but what comes around goes around.

[tymorial]

5. Confidentiality agreements do not protect a company or individual

From criminal acts.

[Gothmog]

7. It takes a valid reason such a violation of the law

[MineralMan]

8. Only on a case by case basis, and only

for good legal cause. People make all sorts of contract, full of all sorts of restrictive clauses. There is no way to make blanket orders legal.