On July 8, 2026, Shia LaBeouf's attorneys asked Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Upinder S. Kalra to compel FKA twigs (Tahliah Barnett) into private arbitration over her lawsuit seeking to void the nondisclosure agreement in their 2020 sexual battery settlement. The fight tests California's STAND Act, which since 2019 has barred confidentiality clauses that silence survivors of sexual assault.
| Detail | Summary |
|---|---|
| What happened | LaBeouf filed a motion to compel private arbitration of FKA twigs' suit challenging her settlement NDA |
| When | Papers filed July 8, 2026 |
| Where | Los Angeles Superior Court, California (Judge Upinder S. Kalra) |
| Who's affected | Survivors bound by pre-dispute NDAs; parties to California settlements with confidentiality clauses |
| Key statute/rule | California STAND Act, Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1001 |
| Impact | Could clarify whether "sexual battery" settlements fall under STAND Act protections |
The dispute reported by Variety is not itself a divorce case, but it turns on a question that reaches directly into family law: when can a confidentiality clause in a private settlement be thrown out, and who gets to decide, a public judge or a private arbitrator? Those questions surface constantly in high-conflict divorces involving allegations of abuse.
Why this matters legally
This motion forces a California court to decide whether a settlement's own arbitration clause can override a survivor's statutory right to speak. The STAND Act (Stand Together Against Non-Disclosure Act), codified at Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1001, voids confidentiality provisions in settlements that would prevent disclosure of facts related to sexual assault, sexual harassment, and related claims. LaBeouf's core argument, according to the reporting, is that the settlement resolved "sexual battery" claims, which he contends sit outside the STAND Act's enumerated categories.
Former State Senator Connie Leyva, who authored the STAND Act in 2018, filed a declaration rejecting that carve-out reading. Her position is that the Legislature intended broad protection for survivors and did not draft a loophole distinguishing "sexual battery" from "sexual assault." A declaration from a bill's author is not binding law, but California courts may consider legislative history when a statute's scope is disputed. The arbitration question is the gatekeeper: if arbitration is compelled, a private arbitrator, not Judge Kalra, decides whether the NDA survives.
How California law handles this
California law strongly disfavors NDAs that muzzle sexual-misconduct survivors, and it has expanded that protection repeatedly since 2019. The STAND Act at Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1001 makes an offending confidentiality clause void as a matter of law and against public policy. A companion provision, Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1002, separately restricts secrecy in civil settlements involving certain sexual offenses. These statutes reflect a clear legislative choice that survivor speech outweighs a defendant's interest in silence.
Arbitration is where the tension lives. Under the Federal Arbitration Act and California's arbitration statutes, courts generally enforce agreements to arbitrate. But the 2022 federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFAA) gives a person alleging sexual assault or harassment the option to void a pre-dispute arbitration clause. Whether EFAA reaches a dispute about voiding an already-signed NDA, rather than the underlying assault claim itself, is exactly the kind of unsettled question courts are now working through.
The family-law crossover is direct. In California divorces, spouses routinely sign marital settlement agreements, and some contain confidentiality or non-disparagement terms. California is a community property state under Cal. Fam. Code § 760, and divorcing couples often negotiate detailed private settlements to divide assets and resolve disputes quietly. But a settlement term cannot lawfully gag a spouse from reporting or discussing sexual abuse, domestic violence, or child abuse. If your divorce settlement contains a confidentiality clause, understanding equitable distribution and what a clause can and cannot restrict is essential before you sign.
California also treats domestic violence as a factor that reshapes divorce outcomes. A documented history of abuse can affect spousal support under Cal. Fam. Code § 4320 and creates a rebuttable presumption against awarding custody to an abusive parent under Cal. Fam. Code § 3044. No private NDA can override those statutory protections, and any clause purporting to conceal abuse from a family court would be unenforceable on public-policy grounds.
Practical takeaways
-
Never sign a settlement NDA that appears to prevent you from reporting sexual assault, domestic violence, or child abuse. Under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1001, such a clause is void, and signing it does not waive your right to speak or report to authorities.
-
Read the arbitration clause separately from the confidentiality clause. A single settlement can force disputes into private arbitration even when the underlying speech restriction is unenforceable. Ask your attorney specifically whether an arbitration provision would move any future fight out of open court.
-
If your divorce involves abuse allegations, document everything and raise it directly with the court. Domestic violence findings drive support and custody outcomes under Cal. Fam. Code § 4320 and Cal. Fam. Code § 3044. A confidentiality clause cannot lawfully suppress that evidence in a family-law proceeding.
-
Distinguish permissible confidentiality from illegal muzzling. California still allows parties to keep a settlement's dollar amount private. What the law forbids is concealing the factual allegations of sexual misconduct. Make sure any NDA you sign is limited to the amount, not the facts.
-
Get tailored guidance before agreeing to any dispute-resolution term. If you are weighing a settlement with confidentiality or arbitration language, a personalized divorce roadmap can help you map your options, and you can find a divorce attorney to review the specific language before you commit.
If you are facing a divorce or settlement that involves confidentiality clauses, arbitration provisions, or allegations of abuse, the details of the language matter enormously, and small wording differences can decide whether a clause is enforceable. A conversation with a qualified California family law attorney before you sign is time well spent.
This article discusses recent news and provides general legal commentary. It does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified family law attorney for advice specific to your situation.