FAS

Court Lifts Gag Order on Former Secrecy Czar

09.12.12 | 2 min read | Text by Steven Aftergood

A federal judge this week granted permission to J. William Leonard, the former director of the Information Security Oversight Office, to discuss three documents that were at issue in the trial of former National Security Agency official Thomas Drake.

Mr. Leonard, an expert witness for the Drake defense, had sought permission to publicly challenge the legitimacy of the classification of one of the documents cited in the indictment against Mr. Drake, which was ultimately dismissed.

The government had opposed the motion to lift the non-disclosure obligations in the protective order that bound Mr. Leonard.  Government attorneys argued that Mr. Leonard had no standing to make such a request, which was filed by Mr. Drake’s public defenders James Wyda and Deborah L. Boardman.  The government also said the request should be denied in order “to prevent a flood of similar claims by non-parties in other completed cases.”  Instead, prosecutors suggested, Mr. Leonard could file a Freedom of Information Act request for the records in question.

But Judge Richard D. Bennett said that “the government’s arguments in this case are inapposite.” Even if the documents were made available to Mr. Leonard under FOIA, “he would not have been permitted to discuss them as he would remain bound by this Court’s Protective Order.”

Judge Bennett therefore formally lifted the Protective Order and granted Mr. Leonard permission to publicly discuss his concerns.

The documents themselves, and the complaint that Mr. Leonard submitted to the Information Security Oversight Office, were released by the National Security Agency under FOIA in July.  (“Defense, Critique of NSA Classification Action Released,” Secrecy News, July 30.)

The complaint itself is still pending, and is awaiting a formal response from the Department of Justice, said the current ISOO director, John P. Fitzpatrick.

The challenge presented by Mr. Leonard extends well beyond the Drake case or the secrecy practices of the National Security Agency.  Essentially, the question posed by the former ISOO director’s complaint is whether there is any threshold beyond which classification of information is so completely unjustified as to trigger third-party intervention to correct the problem.  As of today, such corrective mechanisms are weak or nonexistent.

publications
See all publications
Emerging Technology
day one project
Policy Memo
Strengthening Information Integrity with Provenance for AI-Generated Text Using ‘Fuzzy Provenance’ Solutions

By creating a reliable, user-friendly framework for surfacing provenance, NIST would empower readers to better discern the trustworthiness of the text they encounter, thereby helping to counteract the risks posed by deceptive AI-generated content.

02.13.25 | 7 min read
read more
Education & Workforce
day one project
Policy Memo
Tending Tomorrow’s Soil: Investing in Learning Ecosystems

By investing in the mechanisms that connect learning ecosystems, policymakers can build “neighborhoods” of learning that prepare students for citizenship, work, and life.

02.12.25 | 6 min read
read more
Global Risk
Blog
Don’t Let American Allies Go Nuclear

Empowering U.S. allies to do more so Washington can do and spend less sounds attractive. But enabling, or looking the other way at the spread of nuclear weapons is not in America’s interests anymore today than it was in the 20th century.  

02.12.25 | 5 min read
read more
Government Capacity
day one project
Policy Memo
Protecting Infant Nutrition Security:
Shifting the Paradigm on Breastfeeding to Build a Healthier Future for all Americans

Policymakers on both sides of the aisle agree that no baby should ever go hungry, as evidenced by the bipartisan passage of recent breastfeeding legislation and widely supported regulations. However, significant barriers remain.

02.11.25 | 10 min read
read more