Reply #52: Novak is protected from prosecution under 50USC421 by 50USC422.

[TahitiNut]

As someone with neither a security clearance nor a demonstrable pattern of seeking to identify such agents for the purpose of harming the United States (i.e. a "spy"), he cannot be legitimately prosecuted, under 50USC421, for disclosing Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA agent in his column. (These exceptions and defenses are defined in 50USC422.)

That, however, is but one of the legal issues at play in this story. The other, should Novak be subjected to interrogation within some due process, is whether he identifies his 'source' if so asked, and whether he'd be subject to prosecution for 'Obstruction of Justice' if he refuses. (Under 50USC422, he'd be protected from conviction for violations of 50USC421, even as an accessory.)

The legal principle (AFAIK - IANAL) involved in protecting journalists who refuse to divulge their sources is that divulging the identity of such sources would run contrary to the "public's right to know" (the yin of free speech's yang) what their government is doing. This is synergistic with whistleblower protections but, since those 'protections' are abysmally deficient, we resort to the secrecy of sources refuge. If those who, contrary to law, divulge (what the general public would regard as) government wrongdoing to a journalist were adequately protected from prosecution (and persecution) under whistleblower protection statutes, then we'd not need such an elevated immunization of journalists against divulging their sources.

Clearly, this specific 'source' would not be regarded by most as a whistleblower deserving of protection. (It's not inconceivable, however, that those rabidly loyal to this administration would think they were.) That does not imply, however, that it's not conceivable that someone disclosing the identity of a CIA agent wouldn't be deserving of such protections. Just try to imagine, even most ridiculously, just who could be such an agent and whose agency was of intense legitimate interest to the general public. How about Osama bin-Laden or Saddam Hussein? How about Vladimir Putin? :eyes:

It's not simple, even though some of us may be. :silly: