Jones, Ashby. "Pentagon Papers II? On WikiLeaks and the First Amendment - Law Blog - WSJ." Pentagon Papers II? On WikiLeaks and the First Amendment. 26 July 2010. Web. 25 Jan. 2011. <http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/07/26/pentagon-papers-ii-on-wikileaks-and-the-first-amendment/>.
An article summarizing the discussion revolving around Wikileaks, specifically dealing with the First Amendment. The article brings information and discussion from a few very credible opinions.
Jones, Ashby. "First Amendment Guru Floyd Abrams on the WikiLeaks Situation - Law Blog - WSJ." First Amendment Guru Floyd Abrams on the WikiLeaks Situation. 28 July 2010. Web. 25 Jan. 2011. <http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/07/28/first-amendment-guru-floyd-abrams-on-the-wikileaks-situation/>.
Floyd Abrams, an expert in First Amendment law and visiting professor of Journalism at Columbia University, discusses the legal issues revolving around Wikileaks and specifically, why he thinks nothing will come of the cases against Wikileaks and the media organizations that were given the leaked information.
Daniel Ellsberg, leaker of the Pentagon Papers, defends Wikileaks. This article shows the ethical problems lying under the legal battle between Wikileaks and the United States government.
Wolverton, Troy. (2011, January 20). Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked Pentagon Papers, defends Wikileaks. Silicon Valley Mercury News. Retrieved from
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_17143344?source=most_viewed .
Heres an article about how Julian Assange could be possibly extradited to the US legal system from Sweden.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/11/julian-assange-court-date_n_807112.html
heres an article about how the New York Times and other media things are being threatened legally for things they reported that wikileaks released.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Media-may-face-legal-issues-for-publishing-Wikileaks-cables/articleshow/7083672.cms
What will it mean if the U.S. government pursues legal action against Wikileaks? The first amendment of the Constitution protects the press, there by giving them the freedom to publish what they want.
In the case of Wikileaks, many are accusing them of espionage, for publishing top-secret documents. Yet the nature of the documents does not warrant conviction of espionage. The nature of the documents published by Wikileaks does not matter; rather the way in which the documents were acquired is the only issue. An example of how Wikileaks would be if they directly stole the documents they published, and then they could be convicted. Yet Wikileaks was given many of the documents from a source, making it legal for them to publish.
So if Wikileaks can’t be prosecuted because the documents are not stolen, then how can they be prosecuted? Well this is a sticky situation for the government to try and pursue. To convict Wikileaks they would have to side step the first amendment and every thing it protects in our nation. So this brings up the question how will this case set the precedence for freedom of press and every thing our country was founded on?
SOURCE:
LINDENBERGER, MICHAEL A. "The U.S.'s Weak Legal Case Against WikiLeaks - TIME." Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com. 09 Dec. 2010. Web. 20 Jan. 2011. <http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2035994,00.html>.
An article about the problems prosecutors are having pinning the wikileaks team with an actual crime:
http://news.oxerjen.com/usa/wikileaks-poses-legal-challenges-for-us-prosecutors.html
