The pending prosecution of former National Security Agency official Thomas A. Drake, who was alleged to be a source of classified information in a series of newspaper articles about the NSA, will present “novel” legal issues for the court to consider, prosecutors and defense attorneys said in a joint motion last week.
“The indictment raises complex factual and legal issues and novel questions of law relating to, among other things, the retention of classified materials,” they wrote in an April 29 motion (pdf) to waive the right to a speedy trial.
Unlike former DoD official Larry Franklin in the troubled AIPAC case (which was abandoned by the government before trial last year), Mr. Drake was not charged with unauthorized disclosure of classified information. Instead, he is accused of “willful retention of classified information.” The precise nature of this offense, and the threshold for culpability in this case, remain to be litigated.
“The prosecution of this case will involve classified documents,” the joint motion stated, and the defense “may involve classified documents,” necessitating that defense counsel obtain the required security clearances. “The pre-indictment investigation in this case spanned more than two years,” the motion noted, though defense counsel was not appointed until after the indictment (pdf) issued.
A trial date has been tentatively scheduled for October 18, 2010.
Americans are paying too much for almost everything, because the United States has long treated its trucking industry as an artifact to be preserved rather than as an opportunity for innovation.
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.
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
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.