Comments on: Burden of Proof in AIPAC Case is “Not Insubstantial,” Court Says http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/11/burden_of_proof_in_aipac_case_.html Secrecy News from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Sat, 28 Nov 2009 00:31:30 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Daphine Remish http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/11/burden_of_proof_in_aipac_case_.html/comment-page-1#comment-659 Daphine Remish Thu, 30 Nov 2006 05:01:47 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2006/11/burden_of_proof_in_aipac_case_is_not_insubstantial_court_says.html#comment-659 I do not think that Judge Ellis' ruling obviates a chilling effect on our first amendment speech or press rights. Nobody should have to endure a criminal prosecution (actual or threatened) for republication of any information. It is much preferred that we ensure our laws provide immunity from liability for any republication of information. (free or frictionless flow of information) Judge Ellis is simply expressing his personal preference for ensuring a "knowing" non abetting republisher of classified information should not benefit from a publisher's wrongful conduct. Ironically, Judge Ellis' decision, if allowed to stand, will result in more unrestraint leaks as lawyers advise their republishers to avoid all discussions on the likely impact of republishing the leaked information. I do not think that Judge Ellis’ ruling obviates a chilling effect on our first amendment speech or press rights.

Nobody should have to endure a criminal prosecution (actual or threatened) for republication of any information.

It is much preferred that we ensure our laws provide immunity from liability for any republication of information. (free or frictionless flow of information)

Judge Ellis is simply expressing his personal preference for ensuring a “knowing” non abetting republisher of classified information should not benefit from a publisher’s wrongful conduct.

Ironically, Judge Ellis’ decision, if allowed to stand, will result in more unrestraint leaks as lawyers advise their republishers to avoid all discussions on the likely impact of republishing the leaked information.

]]>