Trump Campaign Ordered to Pay $300,000 in Arbitration to Enforce Its Non-Disclosure Agreement

For the sixth time, we are reporting on the Trump campaign/organization/administration’s failed attempts to enforce its non-disclosure agreements (NDAs).  For past posts, see this one.  This time, the wound it even more self-inflicted than usual.

As reported in The New York Times, Alva Johnson was one of the few Black women who worked for the 2016 Trump campaign.  She sued in 2019, alleging that she “felt violated” when Trump had kissed her against her will at a campaign stop in 2016.  A District Court judge viewed a video of the incident and found that there was no evidence that the kiss was unwanted.  Her claim was dismissed in June 2019.  

The Trump campaign then brought an arbitration proceeding in September 2019, alleging that Ms. Johnson had violated her NDA by disclosing confidential information and making disparaging comments about Mr. Trump.  The arbiter, a retired federal judge, agreed with the District Court about Ms. Johnson’s original lawsuit:

No objective person could view the video of the encounter as anything even remotely supporting an accusation of battery, kissed, assaulted or anything else similar. The federal judge saw it, and the arbitrator sees it.

Nonetheless, the arbiter dismissed the Trump campaign’s arbitration proceeding last December, agreeing with other findings regarding the NDA, and calling it “vague and unenforceable.”  Ms. Johnson sought to recover her legal fees, and last week, the arbiter awarded he $303,000 to cover fees and expenses.  Mr. Trump could have brought a malicious prosecution or defamation claim in an appropriate forum, the arbiter admonished.  Instead, he chose to seek enforcement of the NDA, which other adjudicators had already found to be unconstitutional.