President Donald Trump

A former employee of President Donald Trump's campaign claims in a Manhattan federal court filing that the nondisclosure agreement she signed upon joining the campaign has been “weaponized” by Trump's attorneys in a separate state court sexual harassment suit.

In the suit she filed in Manhattan state Supreme Court in November 2017, California resident Jessica Denson alleges a former male superior, Camilo Jaime Sandoval, and the campaign itself slandered, harassed and sexually discriminated against her, in violation of New York City's human rights laws. The campaign “compounded a slander crusade executed by Sandoval” that included the claim she was responsible for an illegal leak of Trump's taxes, “perpetuating a climate of fear and terror for the extent of her employment and beyond.”

In December, Trump's attorney in the matter, LaRocca Hornik Rosen Greenberg & Blaha name attorney Lawrence Rosen, filed a demand for arbitration in state court. In it, he cited Denson's breach of confidentiality and nondisparagement obligations in the NDA she signed when she began with the Trump campaign. The violation, according to Rosen, was Denson's “publishing certain confidential information and disparaging statements in connection with a lawsuit she filed” in state court.

Rosen did not respond to a request for comment.

In her federal filing, Denson quotes from the NDA, which she suggests focuses specifically on confidential information about Trump and his family.

“The complaint in the state action contains no allegations whatsoever pertaining to the personal life or business affairs of Donald Trump or any of his family members or business,” Denson said in her federal complaint.

She seeks a declaratory judgment from the district court that the NDA is “unenforceable” as a justification in her state suit, where it's being “utilized … to thwart or prohibit the assertion of legal rights in a lawsuit.” She added that the definition of confidential information is “so vague and overly broad” it makes enforcement virtually impossible.

“In effect, the defendant has weaponized the NDA by using it as a club to thwart and chill employees' assertion that defendant has violated their legal rights in the court of their employment by defendant,” Denson's claim stated.

Denson herself declined to comment.

The federal case remains unassigned. The state proceedings dealing with the motion to compel arbitration is expected to be taken up in May.