Snowden's Legal Transgressions: Breaking Laws, Exposing Secrets

In 2013, Edward Snowden, a former CIA systems administrator and NSA contractor, released confidential government documents to the press about the existence of government surveillance programs. According to legal experts and the U.S. government, Snowden's actions violated the Espionage Act of 1917, which identifies the leak of state secrets as treason. Additionally, Snowden has been accused of violating non-disclosure agreements with the CIA and NSA by publishing a book and giving public speeches without prior approval from the agencies. These actions have resulted in legal repercussions, including a lawsuit and criminal charges. Despite breaking the law, Snowden argued that he had a moral obligation to expose the government's violation of privacy. The case has sparked debates about the ethical implications of Snowden's actions and whether they were justified.

Violation of the Espionage Act of 1917

In June 2013, Edward Snowden was charged with violating the Espionage Act of 1917, a federal law enacted on June 15, 1917, shortly after the United States entered World War I. The Espionage Act was intended to prohibit interference with military operations or recruitment, prevent insubordination in the military, and prevent support of enemies of the United States during wartime.

Snowden, a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and a contractor for the National Security Agency (NSA), released confidential government documents to the press about the existence of government surveillance programs. Specifically, he exposed the NSA's PRISM Surveillance Program, revealing that the agency was compiling logs of virtually all telephone calls in the United States and collecting emails of foreigners from major American internet companies.

According to legal experts and the U.S. government, Snowden's actions violated the Espionage Act, which criminalizes the leak of state secrets and identifies it as an act of treason. The Act states that one is guilty if they disclose classified information "with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation". Snowden's leak of confidential information related to national defense and intelligence operations fell within the scope of this provision.

The Espionage Act imposes stiff penalties for such violations, including the possibility of the death penalty, imprisonment of up to 30 years, or both. Snowden's actions sparked a debate between those who considered him a traitor and those who viewed him as a hero for exposing government overreach and violating privacy. Despite the controversy, Snowden argued that he had a moral obligation to act as a whistleblower and inform the public about the government's actions.

Violation of non-disclosure agreements with the CIA and NSA

In 2013, Edward Snowden, a former CIA employee and NSA contractor, leaked classified documents about the US government's mass surveillance program. Snowden has since been living in Russia, outside of the jurisdiction of the US.

In 2019, the US government filed a civil lawsuit against Snowden, alleging that he violated non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) with the CIA and NSA. The lawsuit specifically pertained to Snowden's publication of a book, titled "Permanent Record", and his public speeches on intelligence-related matters, both of which the US government claimed were in violation of his NDAs.

The NDAs that Snowden signed with the CIA and NSA included pre-publication review obligations, requiring him to submit any material intended for publication to the agencies for review. Snowden allegedly failed to do this for both his book and his speeches.

The US government sought to recover all proceeds earned by Snowden from the book and the speeches, arguing that he breached his contractual and fiduciary obligations. The lawsuit did not seek to restrict the publication or distribution of "Permanent Record", but rather to ensure that Snowden did not financially benefit from his breach of contract.

The US government's position was that Snowden's actions violated his legal obligations and that he unlawfully profited from his access to classified national security information. They argued that the protection of sensitive national security information depends on employees' and contractors' compliance with their NDAs, including pre-publication review requirements.

Breach of the Oath of Office

Edward Snowden, a former CIA systems administrator and NSA intelligence contractor, leaked confidential government documents in 2013. These documents revealed the existence of global surveillance programs, many of which were run by the NSA and the Five Eyes intelligence alliance.

Snowden's actions have been widely debated, with some arguing that he violated the Espionage Act of 1917 and committed treason, while others see him as a whistleblower who exposed government overreach and violated an unjust law.

While Snowden's specific breach of the Oath of Office is not explicitly mentioned, as an American government employee, he would have taken this oath, swearing to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic" and to "bear true faith and allegiance to the same".

By leaking confidential information, Snowden arguably broke his promise to defend the Constitution, which includes a right to privacy. This breach of the Oath of Office is a serious matter, as it calls into question Snowden's loyalty and commitment to upholding the values enshrined in the Constitution.

In addition to the Espionage Act of 1917, Snowden may have also violated non-disclosure agreements with the CIA and NSA. In 2019, the US government filed a lawsuit against Snowden, alleging that he failed to submit his memoir, "Permanent Record," for pre-publication review, as required by his contractual obligations. The lawsuit resulted in a judgment in favor of the government, with Snowden ordered to relinquish over $5.2 million in earnings from his book and speeches.

Snowden's actions have sparked intense debate about national security, individual privacy, and the role of whistleblowers. While some argue that he broke the law and endangered national security, others contend that he exposed government overreach and sparked a necessary conversation about surveillance and privacy.

Snowden himself has argued that he had a moral obligation to inform the public, regardless of the legality of his actions. He has stated that he carefully evaluated the documents he disclosed and only released those that were in the public interest.

The consequences of Snowden's actions are still being debated, with some arguing that he caused significant harm to national security, while others highlight the positive impact on government transparency and the public's right to privacy.

Violation of federal laws against disclosing classified information

Edward Snowden, a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and a contractor for the National Security Agency (NSA), leaked confidential government documents to the press in 2013. According to legal experts and the U.S. government, Snowden's actions violated federal laws against disclosing classified information, specifically the Espionage Act of 1917, which prohibits the leak of state secrets and classifies such an act as treason.

Snowden's release of information revealed the existence of government surveillance programs. While Snowden argued that he had a moral obligation to "whistleblow" and expose the government's violation of privacy, the U.S. government and many legal experts deemed his actions illegal and a breach of national security.

Snowden's actions can be analysed through the lens of federal laws prohibiting the disclosure of classified information. Here is an overview of the relevant statutes and their implications:

Espionage Act of 1917

The Espionage Act of 1917, which has been amended over the years, forms a key part of the legal framework related to the unauthorised disclosure of classified information. This Act specifically addresses the leak of state secrets and deems such actions as treasonous. In Snowden's case, his release of information on government surveillance programs fell within the scope of the Espionage Act, leading to accusations of treason.

18 U.S.C. § 798 – Disclosure of Classified Information

This statute, part of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, prohibits the knowing and willful disclosure of classified information. It defines "classified information" as information designated by a U.S. government agency for restricted dissemination due to national security concerns. The statute outlines specific categories of information that fall under this classification, including cryptographic systems, communication intelligence activities, and information obtained through intelligence processes. Violations of this statute carry penalties of up to 10 years in prison, fines, or both.

18 U.S.C. § 1924 – Unauthorized Removal and Retention of Classified Documents or Material

This statute makes it a federal crime for government officers, employees, contractors, or consultants to knowingly remove or retain classified documents or materials without authorisation. It focuses on the unauthorised removal of classified documents from designated locations and the intent to retain them in unauthorised areas. Violations can result in fines, imprisonment of up to five years, or both, depending on the level of classification, intended use, and harm caused.

Snowden's disclosure of classified information related to government surveillance programs violated these federal laws, particularly the Espionage Act of 1917 and 18 U.S.C. § 798. His actions were deemed illegal and a threat to national security, resulting in criminal charges and a permanent injunction against him.

Violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act

In 2013, Edward Snowden, a former CIA systems administrator and NSA contractor, leaked confidential government documents to the press, exposing details of America's global surveillance operations. Snowden's actions are believed to have violated the Espionage Act of 1917, which identifies the leak of state secrets as an act of treason.

One of the programs exposed by Snowden was PRISM, a program under which the NSA collects internet communications from various US internet companies. The program was authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 removed the requirement that the government obtain a warrant from the FISA Court when seeking to wiretap communications between a foreign target and an American from inside the US. It also broadened the scope of permissible foreign targets to include private citizens not suspected of any wrongdoing.

While the target must be a foreigner overseas, Section 702 surveillance is believed to result in the "incidental" collection of millions of Americans' communications. Agencies such as the FBI make broad use of these communications, despite Section 702 requiring them to "minimize" the retention and sharing of Americans' information.

Snowden's disclosure of PRISM and other surveillance programs sparked a debate about the legality and ethical implications of his actions. While some argued that Snowden broke the law and should be prosecuted, others defended his actions as ethical and justified in the public interest.

In addition to violating the Espionage Act, Snowden may have also violated non-disclosure agreements he signed with the CIA and NSA by publishing a book and giving public speeches on intelligence-related matters without prior approval from the agencies.

Frequently asked questions