FAS

Court Should Not Recognize “Good Leaks,” Govt Says

07.05.11 | 2 min read | Text by Steven Aftergood

To admit the possibility of a “good leak” of classified information would undermine the entire classification system, government attorneys told a court (pdf) last week, and therefore it should not do so.

The government’s statement was presented in a response to New York Times reporter James Risen’s June 21 motion to quash a subpoena to compel him to testify in the case of Jeffrey A. Sterling, a former CIA officer who is accused of disclosing classified information to Risen without authorization.

In his motion to quash, Mr. Risen had urged the court to consider “the public interest in newsgathering, measured by the leaked information’s value” and the damage to the public interest which would ensue from compelling him to testify.

But the government said the court should do no such thing.

“[E]xplicitly recognizing ‘good leaks’ of classified information… would effectively destroy the system through which the country protects that information,” the government said in its July 1 response.

“It would encourage government employees who are provided access to classified information to betray their commitment to safeguard it by suggesting that they, too, should undertake their own independent analysis of the effect of their disclosure of that information should they desire to do so.  It would also provide a ready-made defense for every disgruntled intelligence community employee or contractor who discloses such information to the press because he harbors a grudge against the institution for which he works,” the government attorneys argued (p. 28).

From a different perspective, “good leaks” are a uniquely effective remedy to what President Obama once called “the problem of over classification.”  Unless and until overclassification can be curtailed through other means, some types of leaks serve as a necessary safety valve, especially when they reveal classified information involving criminal activity, misconduct or mismanagement.

In its response to Risen, the government argued forcefully against Risen’s invocation of a reporter’s privilege and urged the Court to require him to testify in the Sterling case.  The legal issues will be argued before the court at a July 7 hearing.  See related coverage in Politico and the Washington Post.

publications
See all publications
Emerging Technology
day one project
Policy Memo
Antitrust in the AI Era: Strengthening Enforcement Against Emerging Anticompetitive Behavior

Given the rapid pace of AI advancement, a proactive effort triumphs over a reactive one. To protect consumers, workers, and the economy more broadly, it is imperative that the FTC and DOJ adapt their enforcement strategies to meet the complexities of the AI era.

01.10.25 | 8 min read
read more
Emerging Technology
day one project
Policy Memo
Clearing the Path for New Uses for Generic Drugs

To encourage greater adoption of generic drugs in clinical practice the FDA should implement a dedicated regulatory pathway for non-manufacturers to seek approval of new indications for repurposed generic drugs.

01.09.25 | 16 min read
read more
Environment
day one project
Policy Memo
Using Pull Finance for Market-driven Infrastructure and Asset Resilience

The increasing frequency of extreme weather events, which caused over $200 billion in global economic losses in 2023, is disrupting global supply chains and exacerbating migration pressures, particularly for the U.S. Investing in climate resilience abroad offers a significant opportunity for U.S. businesses in technology, engineering, and infrastructure, while also supporting job creation at home.

01.09.25 | 10 min read
read more
Education & Workforce
Blog
Alaska Statewide Mentor Project is Reaching Rural Teachers

Early-career and out-of-state teachers tend to be most heavily concentrated in Alaska’s rural schools, where they face a steep curve in adjusting to a new way of life while learning the ropes of teaching.

01.08.25 | 3 min read
read more