- Obama military downsizing leaves U.S. too weak to counter global threats, panel finds
- Sen. Tom Coburn vows to slow down budget-busting bills ahead of recess
- Obama fantasizes about more executive power, signs new order on federal contractors
- Clintons call Klein, Halper, Kessler ‘a Hat Trick of despicable actors’: report
- Boehner accuses Obama of ‘legacy of lawlessness’
- Pro-marijuana group claims responsibility for Brooklyn Bridge flag swap
- Young adults shun Obamacare mostly due to cost: survey
- Stabbing attack on transgender girl, 15, was ‘bias motivated,’ police say
- LGBT adults still lean overwhelmingly toward Democratic Party
- Lawmakers rattled by Syria genocide horrors, call on Obama to act
Lobbyists win classified leaks ruling
Question of the Day
The U.S. government Tuesday lost a critical appeal in a case involving America's largest pro-Israel organization - a development that could bolster the rights of reporters, lobbyists and social activists to obtain and publicize classified government information.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the government's latest effort to loosen the high standard it has to meet to prosecute Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman, who are former lobbyists for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
The two men were accused in 2005 under a 1917 espionage law of obtaining classified information about Iran and leaking the information to a Washington Post reporter and an Israeli diplomat. The case has attracted strong interest from both the foreign policy community and civil liberties groups.
Mr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman are the first private citizens prosecuted under the Espionage Act for mishandling classified information obtained through conversation, a precedent that, if upheld, could make much national security journalism and foreign-policy lobbying a federal crime.
Advocates of more openness involving national-security matters said the ruling Tuesday could spell the end of the case.
"I think it dictates a losing outcome for the government sooner rather than later," said Steven Aftergood, director of the project on government secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. "This has been an extraordinary case in which nongovernment employees who do not hold security clearances are accused of a crime based on the fact that they received classified information and disseminated it. That is the kind of transaction that countless reporters, lobbyists and activists engage in all the time. This was really a landmark case that could have been disastrous for freedom of the press if it turned out another way."
"It's a really good week for us," said Mr. Weissman, who, like Mr. Rosen, lost his job at AIPAC after the charges were filed. "It's not done, but the landscape may shift."
AIPAC and Mr. Rosen declined to comment.
The appeals court ruled that it did not have the jurisdiction to reopen a 2006 ruling by Judge T.S. Ellis III that the prosecution must prove that Mr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman knew the information they had received and disclosed was potentially damaging to national security.
"That is a very high bar to meet in court," said Baruch Weiss, an attorney for Mr. Weissman.
Gregg Leslie, legal-defense director for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said he was pleased that a higher standard for prosecuting private citizens appears to remain.
"We are definitely happy to see that again the judges are demanding a great deal for a private citizen in this case, or a journalist in another case, to be prosecuted under the espionage statute," he said.
Peter Carr, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office for the Eastern District of Virginia, said the government was "reviewing the decision and will respond in court." A conference is scheduled for Thursday at the Federal Courthouse in Alexandria.
An initial appeal by the government attempted to limit the classified documents that the defense could introduce.
"The defendants have said they needed to show classified information to show that their disclosures did not violate the law," said Abbe Lowell, attorney for Mr. Rosen. "The trial court agreed with them, and now the court of appeals has agreed as well. With the court's rulings on what the government must prove and the rulings as to who we can call as witnesses, the defendants are very anxious to go trial."
• Ben Conery and Barbara Slavin contributed to this report.
About the Author
Both parties recognize the Democrats' scam
- Inside the Ring: Israel surprised by Hamas tunnel network
- CRUZ: A tale of two hospitals: One in Israel, one in Gaza
- Chicken pox outbreak puts illegal immigrant facility on lockdown
- Sarah Palin's online channel hits snag as Stephen Colbert buys similar URL
- Obama military strategy too weak for future security, panel reports
- CIA admits improperly hacking Senate computers in search of Bush-era information
- 3 African leaders cancel trip to U.S. over Ebola outbreak; Obama still plans summit
- Colorado poll shows women tuning out Democrats' 'war on women' strategy
- Report: 40% of weapons sent to Afghanistan are unaccounted for
- House votes to sue President Obama over claims of presidential power
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world