What protects Glenn Greenwald from liability under U.S. law for his role in the publication of classified materials provided by Snowden?
<p>Edward Snowden leaked classified U.S. government materials to be published by Glenn Greenwald.</p>

<p>Chelsea Manning leaked classified U.S. government materials to be published by Julian Assange.</p>

<p>Now,</p>

<ul>
<li>Manning has been successfully prosecuted in the U.S.</li>
<li>The U.S. government has made clear its intention to prosecute Snowden if it can get its hands on him.</li>
<li>Julian Assange is the subject of a criminal investigation, and has been successfully scared into hiding in an Ecuadorian embassy.</li>
</ul>

<p>However, Greenwald appears to enjoy immunity from prosecution for his role in the publication of Snowden's materials.</p>

<p><strong>What is the basis of immunity, and why does it not extend to the other three?</strong></p>

<p>There is no question of immunity.</p>

<p>Manning and probably Snowdon have committed a crime by stealing officially classified documents and releasing them unlawfully.</p>

<p>Greenwald and probably Assange have committed no crime by publishing the documents as such publication is protected by the First Amendment and there is a swathe of case law on this. This presumes that they were not an accessory to the crimes of the people who stole them.</p>

<p>To clarify, Assange is in hiding in the Ecuadorian embassy in London to avoid being extradited to Sweden to face questioning about sexual assaults. He is not charged with anything anywhere about publishing the Manning documents.</p>

<p>Dale M makes multiple false statements at the end of his answer.  Here are some corrections, and then my answer:  </p>

<p>1)Assange is NOT <em>in hiding</em> in the Ecuadorian embassy in London and is <em>not</em> avoiding questioning.*  Assange has agreed to make himself available for questioning, and remains so, but the Swedish prosecutor refuses to interview him.*  He was granted asylum in Ecuador and resides in the embassy because of the espionage case.*  </p>

<p>As the <a href="https://justice4assange.com/UN-Working-Group-on-Arbitrary.html" rel="nofollow">United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention Chair and Norwegian international Law Professor Mads Andenæs has said in an interview</a>,</p>

<p>"[T]he Swedish authorities could have followed the normal practice of interviewing Assange in a British police interview room.</p>

<p>After Assange took residence in the Ecuadorian embassy they could have relied on ’mutual assistance’ protocols, questioned Assange by video link, and given him the chance to respond to the allegations against him."</p>

<p>2)He IS being investigated with respect to espionage charges related to publishing the Manning documents.  There's no evidence the secret grand jury has ceased its investigation.</p>

<p>3)There IS a question regarding immunity.  Greenwald is fearful and takes extreme precautions when he travels to the US because he fears abusive prosecution for and further interference with his work as a journalist. </p>

<p>The US government did try to stop the US media from publishing the Pentagon Papers and <strong>succeeded</strong> <em>temporarily</em> - and <strong>very nearly succeeded</strong> <em>permanently</em>.  Charges under the Espionage Act could be used against Greenwald and the media employing him, despite <em>US v. NY Times</em>. </p>

<p>*Detailed evidence that repudiates the false statements and supports the corrections is referred to <a href="https://justice4assange.com/Assange-Case-Fact-Checker.html" rel="nofollow">here: https://justice4assange.com/Assange-Case-Fact-Checker.html</a></p>

united-states freedom-of-speech