FAS

A Tutorial on the Classified Information Procedures Act

05.10.10 | 2 min read | Text by Steven Aftergood

Last week, prosecutors in the case of Thomas A. Drake, the former NSA official who is charged with unlawfully retaining classified information that he allegedly disclosed to a reporter, asked the court to hold a pre-trial conference on the use of the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) in that case.

CIPA was passed by Congress in 1980 to regulate the disclosure of classified information in criminal prosecutions, such as espionage cases, and to prevent so-called “graymail,” in which a defendant threatens to release classified information in the hope of forcing the government to abandon the case.

In a nutshell, CIPA requires the defense to notify prosecutors and the court of any classified evidence it intends to introduce.  Courts must then determine if the classified evidence is admissible. If so, the government may propose an unclassified substitution that does not involve classified information.  But if the court finds that the unclassified substitution is inadequate to preserve the defendant’s right to a fair trial, and if the Attorney General objects to disclosure of the classified version, then the indictment may be dismissed.

Perhaps assuming that the judge (or the defense) was unfamiliar with the law, prosecutors in the Thomas Drake case filed a motion (pdf) explaining the meaning of each section of CIPA.

The purpose of their CIPA tutorial was “to inform the Court of the applicability of CIPA and its procedures to issues involving classified information that will arise before and during the trial of this case,” they wrote. See “Government’s Motion for Pretrial Conference Under Section 2 of the Classified Information Procedures Act,” May 5, 2010.

The development and early history of CIPA were reviewed by the Congressional Research Service in a March 2, 1989 report entitled “Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA): An Overview.”

The use of CIPA to preserve defendants’ rights while protecting classified information in criminal trials presents a stark contrast with the absence of any comparable procedure in civil trials, particularly those in which the government invokes the state secrets privilege to prevent the use of classified evidence.

“For almost 30 years, courts have effectively applied [CIPA] to make criminal trials fairer and safer,” the Senate Judiciary Committee noted in a 2008 report on the pending State Secrets Protection Act.  “Yet in civil cases, litigants have been left behind.”

“Congress has failed to provide clear rules or standards for determining whether evidence is protected by the state secrets privilege. We’ve failed to develop procedures that will protect injured parties and also prevent the disclosure of sensitive information. Because use of the state secrets privilege has escalated in recent years, there’s an increasing need for the judiciary and the Executive to have clear, fair, and safe rules,” the Judiciary Committee report said.

A legislative response to the problems posed by the unilateral use of the state secrets privilege by the executive branch remains to be accomplished.

publications
See all publications
Emerging Technology
Report
SOURCE CODE: A Policy Agenda for Fostering Trust and Fairness in AI

These ideas aim to advance the detailed policy solutions needed to foster public trust and implement fairness in the adoption of AI across diverse domains, from healthcare and government benefits to rural access, education, and worker protections.

06.11.26 | 17 min read
read more
Emerging Technology
day one project
Policy Memo
Move Algorithmic-Driven Pay and Scheduling Systems From Surveillance Pay to Fair Wages

The evidence is clear: algorithmic pay-setting is established in app-based work, and payroll/timekeeping failures show how software can produce systemic wage harm at scale

06.11.26 | 15 min read
read more
Emerging Technology
day one project
Policy Memo
How State Leaders Can Put People First in AI Decision-Making

While a few states have taken steps to implement decision-making mechanisms for certain AI systems, too many leaders are simply accepting narratives about AI’s purported public benefit at face value – jumping to the “how” of AI implementation before thoroughly vetting potential systems and deciding whether they are appropriate to use at all.

06.11.26 | 17 min read
read more
Emerging Technology
day one project
Policy Memo
Empowering Communities through Community Benefit Agreements in AI-Fueled Data Center Development

When properly structured — with specific numeric targets, secured financial obligations, independent monitoring, and meaningful enforcement — CBAs transform data center deals into durable community partnerships.

06.10.26 | 16 min read
read more