Charging someone with libel or slander is fundamentally different than suing for breach of contract. For example, you don't need an anti-disparagement contract with someone to sue for slander, nor is disparagement necessarily slander.

Now, Congress could pass a law saying the anti-disparagement contracts are unenforceable. But would we really want that? Suppose you hire a nanny to watch your kids, and then she quits and writes a tell-all book about your private, embarrassing personal life? You can bet that nannies for high-profile people have anti-disparagement contracts, and are paid well as a consequence. Which seems quite reasonable to me.

It probably won't happen anyway. But I don't think this is a good argument for these non-disparagement contracts.

You might feel different if you were a celebrity. I know one, and it's sad to see the curtains always drawn on the windows of the house, the paparazzi camped out in front, etc. I could see a nanny being hired and then threatening the celebrity with a tell-all book, or just cashing in on it anyway.

The point is that writing such a book is not always "disparagement".

I don't understand your point. The condition of employment at many places, not just celebrities, is that you don't talk about it outside of work. You get well paid for this discretion. Do you think that is a violation of your rights? I don't, the moment you accept the money.

How about NDAs? Should they be unenforceable?

How about Secret Service agents protecting the President. Should they not have to zip their lips about what they see and hear about what goes on in the White House? Is that a violation of their rights to accept such conditions of employment?

Many disputes are settled with the terms being non-disclosed. Should those be unenforceable, too?

I am not suggesting that the terms not be enforceable, which probably won't happen anyway.