Legal analysis: How strong is the government’s case against Snowden?
Snowden's own description suggests he may be guilty of the crimes alleged. But in criminal law, motives are crucial
Topics: Legal issues, Glenn Greenwald, Edward Snowden, NSA, Whistleblower, Espionage, espionage act, Editor's Picks, Martin Luther King, Jr., Civil Liberties, Politics News
Is Edward Snowden a hero or a criminal? Phrasing the debate over Snowden’s actions in this way, as ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos did earlier this week, obscures the possibility that he may well be both things at once.
Given his own description of his behavior, there is little doubt Snowden is guilty of the crimes with which the government has now charged him: theft of government property, unauthorized communication of national defense information, and willful communication of classified communications intelligence information to an unauthorized person. (As was reported this weekend, Snowden has left Hong Kong and is seeking asylum in another country via Russia.)
Writing in the Guardian, Glenn Greenwald argues that there is something perverse about charging Snowden with what, under federal law, is a violation of the Espionage Act:
In what conceivable sense are Snowden’s actions “espionage”? He could have – but chose not – sold the information he had to a foreign intelligence service for vast sums of money, or covertly passed it to one of America’s enemies, or worked at the direction of a foreign government. That is espionage. He did none of those things.
This is an important point: In criminal law, motives are crucial, and from what we know, it does not appear that Snowden’s motive was either to profit personally from his actions, or to aid another nation at the expense of the United States.
Nevertheless, the Espionage Act is a very broadly worded statute, and the government has the option to use it to treat the leaking of classified information as a crime, no matter what the leaker’s intentions may have been.
Nor is it likely to avail Snowden, legally speaking, to claim some sort of whistle-blowing defense: from what has been published so far, it doesn’t appear that Snowden’s leaks pertain to any illegal activity on the part of the government. (This is a perfect illustration of Michael Kinsley’s famous aphorism that “the scandal isn’t what’s illegal, it’s what’s legal.)
So Snowden, it appears, is in fact a criminal under our current laws. But that is far from the end of the story.
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado at Boulder. More Paul Campos.









Comments
13 Comments