Snowden's Secrets: Breaking Laws, Exposing Truths

In 2013, Edward Snowden leaked highly classified information from the National Security Agency (NSA) and was subsequently charged with espionage by the US government. Snowden's disclosures revealed numerous global surveillance programs, many run by the NSA and the Five Eyes intelligence alliance. He was indicted for two counts of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and theft of government property. Snowden's actions sparked debates around mass surveillance, government secrecy, and the balance between national security and information privacy. While some have labelled him a traitor, others have hailed him as a hero for his whistleblowing. Snowden has since been granted asylum in Russia and became a naturalized citizen in 2022.

Breached non-disclosure agreements with the CIA and NSA

Edward Snowden, a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and contractor for the National Security Agency (NSA), breached non-disclosure agreements with the CIA and NSA by publishing his book, Permanent Record, without submitting it for a pre-publication review.

Snowden's memoir, published on September 17, 2019, details his childhood, time as a CIA employee and NSA subcontractor, and asylum in Russia. The US government filed a lawsuit against Snowden, arguing that he violated the non-disclosure agreements he signed with the CIA and NSA. The lawsuit did not seek to restrict the publication or distribution of the book but aimed to recover all proceeds earned by Snowden due to his failure to comply with pre-publication review requirements.

According to the lawsuit, Snowden was required to submit his book for pre-publication review to ensure it did not contain classified information. By not doing so, the US government argued that Snowden put national security at risk and breached the trust placed in him. Snowden's actions also went against the terms of his employment agreements with the CIA and NSA, which required him to protect sensitive national security information.

Snowden's attorney, Ben Wizner, defended his actions by stating that the book contained no new government secrets and that Snowden did not believe the government would review the book in good faith. Wizner also highlighted an ongoing lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the pre-publication review system.

The breach of non-disclosure agreements by Snowden had significant consequences. The US government sought to collect all proceeds from the book and prevent Snowden from profiting from his unauthorized release of classified information. This was achieved through a court ruling, which found that Snowden had to relinquish more than $5.2 million in earnings from the book and speaking engagements to a constructive trust for the government.

Snowden's actions sparked intense debate and raised important questions about national security, individual privacy, and the balance between the two. While some viewed him as a traitor, others considered him a whistleblower and a hero for exposing government surveillance programs. The impact of his disclosures extended beyond the US, with several countries re-evaluating their intelligence-gathering operations and relationships with the US.

Violated the Espionage Act of 1917

In 2013, Edward Snowden exposed the existence of previously classified mass intelligence-gathering surveillance programs run by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) and the U.K.’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ). Snowden's actions were deemed a violation of 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 of 1917 was intended to prohibit interference with military operations or recruitment, prevent insubordination in the military, and stop the support of enemies of the United States during wartime. The law imposed stiff penalties, including the death penalty, for:

• Conveying information with the intent to interfere with the operation or success of the U.S. armed forces or to promote the success of its enemies.
• Conveying false reports or statements with the intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the U.S. or to promote the success of its enemies.
• Causing or attempting to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty in the military or naval forces of the U.S.
• Willfully obstructing the recruiting or enlistment service of the U.S.

Snowden was charged with "unauthorized communication of national defense information" and "willful communication of classified intelligence with an unauthorized person" under the Espionage Act. He was also accused of committing treason by identifying the leak of state secrets.

While Snowden's actions did break the law, many have argued that he performed a public service and had a moral obligation to expose the government's violation of privacy. Snowden himself stated that he had a duty "to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them."

The Espionage Act of 1917 has been amended numerous times and its constitutionality, relationship to free speech, and the meaning of its language have been the subject of ongoing debate and controversy.

Committed treason by leaking state secrets

Edward Snowden is a former CIA systems administrator and NSA intelligence contractor who, in 2013, leaked highly classified information about the existence of global surveillance programs. He was subsequently charged with espionage by the US government and fled the country.

Snowden's actions are considered by many legal experts, and the US government, to have violated the Espionage Act of 1917, which identifies the leak of state secrets as an act of treason. However, Snowden himself has argued that he had a moral obligation to act as a whistleblower, stating that he had a duty to expose the government's violation of privacy and inform the public.

The Espionage Act prohibits the publication of information that could be used "to the injury of the United States". Snowden's actions revealed numerous global surveillance programs, including those run by the NSA and the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, in cooperation with telecommunication companies and European governments.

Despite facing criminal charges and US indictment, Snowden has not been extradited and currently resides in Russia, where he was granted citizenship in 2022. The debate around Snowden's actions and their ethical implications continues, with some agreeing with his rationale and others arguing that he broke the law and caused harm to national security.

Broke US law by sharing top-secret information

Edward Snowden broke US law by sharing top-secret information. In 2013, Snowden, a former CIA systems administrator, revealed the existence of previously classified mass intelligence-gathering surveillance programs run by the US National Security Agency (NSA) and the UK's Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ). He was subsequently charged with espionage and fled the country, seeking asylum in Russia.

Snowden's actions violated the Espionage Act of 1917, which identified the leak of state secrets as an act of treason. He was also charged with a political crime—a crime against the state—and the US government requested his extradition from Hong Kong. However, because Hong Kong does not have an extradition agreement with the US, Snowden was not extradited and has avoided jail time.

Snowden's decision to release confidential government documents has sparked ethical debates. Some argue that he had a moral obligation to inform the public about the government's violation of privacy, regardless of legality. Jesselyn Radack of the Government Accountability Project defended his actions as ethical, claiming that he acted for the public good. Others, including US Attorney General Eric Holder, argued that Snowden broke the law and caused harm to national security.

In addition to the criminal charges, Snowden also faces a civil lawsuit filed by the US government in September 2019. The lawsuit alleges that Snowden violated his non-disclosure agreements with the CIA and NSA by publishing a book and giving public speeches on intelligence-related matters without prior approval from the agencies. The government sought to recover all proceeds earned by Snowden due to his failure to comply with his contractual obligations. In December 2019, the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled in favour of the government, ordering Snowden to relinquish over $5.2 million in earnings from his book and speeches.

Failed to submit his book for pre-publication review

In 2013, Edward Snowden released confidential government documents to the press, exposing the existence of government surveillance programs run by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) and the U.K.'s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ). Snowden's actions were deemed illegal by the U.S. government, and he was charged under the Espionage Act. He has since been living in exile in Russia.

In addition to the criminal charges, the U.S. government filed a civil lawsuit against Snowden in September 2019, alleging that he failed to submit his book, "Permanent Record," for pre-publication review. The lawsuit claims that Snowden violated the non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) he signed with the CIA and NSA, which required him to submit any publications for review before releasing them to the public.

The Justice Department is not seeking to restrict the publication or distribution of "Permanent Record". Instead, they aim to recover all proceeds earned from the book's sales, arguing that Snowden's failure to comply with his contractual obligations justifies the seizure of any profits. The lawsuit also names the publisher as a defendant to ensure that no funds are transferred to Snowden during the legal proceedings.

Snowden's attorney, Ben Wizner of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), argued that the book does not contain any secrets that have not already been reported by news outlets. Wizner also questioned the government's pre-publication review process, suggesting that it gives the government excessive power to suppress free speech. The ACLU and the Knight First Amendment Institute have challenged the constitutionality of this process in a separate lawsuit.

The case of Edward Snowden highlights the ongoing debate surrounding whistleblowing and the protection of sensitive government information. While some view Snowden as a traitor who violated the law, others consider him a hero for exposing government overreach and protecting civil liberties.

Frequently asked questions