Several media outlets are reporting that President Trump’s political landing team at the Environmental Protection Agency, which draws heavily from energy industry lobby and pro-drilling think tanks, is prohibiting employees from speaking to the media. Politico reports that the landing team is “limiting employees’ ability to issue news releases, tweet or otherwise communicate with the outside world.”

As the EPA is molded into a think tank or trade association for the oil and coal industries, new leadership at the agency would be well-advised to reconsider their apparent adoption of Soviet-style censorship tactics. The U.S. is still a free society in which the First Amendment prohibits prior restraints on speech and viewpoint discrimination, and permits government employees to speak as private citizens on matters of public concern.

And the anti-gag provisions in the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA) prohibit agencies from adopting non-disclosure policies that bar whistleblowing to Congress, OIGs, OSC, and the media. As described in the Senate Report accompanying the WPEA, Section 115 require[s] every nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement of the U.S. Government to contain specific language . . . alert[ing] employees that the nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement does not override employee rights and obligations created by existing statute or Executive Order relating to classified information, communications with Congress, the reporting of violations to an inspector general (IG), or whistleblower protection.” The WPEA also prohibits agencies from implementing or enforcing any nondisclosure policy or agreement that fails to contain a disclaimer about whistleblower rights and protections.  See 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(13).

In addition, the WPEA prohibits retaliation against government scientists who challenge censorship or make disclosures related to the integrity of the scientific process.  “Censorship” is broadly defined to include “any effort to distort, misrepresent, or suppress research, analysis, or technical information.” The WPEA protects a disclosure of information that an employee reasonably believes is evidence of censorship related to research, analysis, or technical information that is, or will cause, gross government waste or mismanagement, an abuse of authority, a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, or any violation of law.

The legislative history of the WPEA explains the purpose of protecting disclosures about censorship of scientific research:

The Committee has heard concerns that federal employees may be discouraged from, or retaliated against for, disclosing evidence of unlawful or otherwise improper censorship of research, analysis, and other technical information related to scientific research. . . . It is essential that Congress and the public receive accurate data and findings from federal researchers and analysts to inform lawmaking and other public policy decisions.

Though elections have consequences and a new Administration is certainly entitled to  set a new policy direction at the EPA and other agencies, the Administration is not entitled to suspend the First Amendment or violate federal whistleblower protection laws. Hopefully new leadership at the EPA will retract its censorship policy and adhere to bedrock American freedoms and values.