- Free Consultation: 703-298-9562 Tap Here to Call Us
First amendment and leaking information
Here is the intro from Kent Scheidegger of CrimeandConsequences blog.
To refute the notion that freedom of speech or the press is absolute, a common device is to cite a hypothetical of spoken or written words that everyone with sense would agree can be prohibited. The most famous is Justice Holmes’s example in Schenk v. United States, 249 U.S. 47, 52 (1919), “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.” Another classic is that of Chief Justice Hughes in Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697, 716 (1931), “No one would question but that a government might prevent … the publication of the sailing dates of transports or the number and location of troops.”
Now read, John Christoffersen, Ex-sailor sentenced to 10 years in terror case, Washington Post, 3 April 2009.