When Julian Assange abruptly found himself back in Australia and freedom this week after reaching a plea deal with the U.S. government, I found myself thinking back to my own marathon legal fight with the U.S. government and how it finally and suddenly ended.
A Lengthy Legal Battle:
I waged a seven-year legal battle against the George W. Bush administration and later the Obama administration, both of which demanded I reveal the confidential sources I had relied on for a story I wrote about a botched CIA operation. The government launched a leak investigation, subpoenaing me in 2008 to try to force me to testify and reveal my sources. I refused and fought them all the way to the Supreme Court.
A Victory Against Government Pressure:
In 2015, as negative publicity mounted on the Obama administration for its campaign to put a reporter in prison, I was called to attend a court hearing. The prosecutor asked me whether I would go to prison rather than reveal my sources, and I said yes. The government backed down, abandoning its efforts to force me to testify. I felt free for the first time in seven years.
The Anti-Press Campaign:
My case was part of a broader crackdown on reporters and whistleblowers that began in the post-9/11 era. The Assange case was part of that same anti-press campaign, one that the government has continued to conduct under both Republican and Democratic administrations.
A Personal Connection:
My personal experience has made me sympathize with Assange, even as so many other Americans have turned on him. My legal fight left me exhausted, mentally and physically, especially during the long periods when my case was being ignored by the press and the outside world.
Assange’s Controversial Past:
Assange was a polarizing figure long before he faced prosecution, with enemies on both sides of the American political divide. Republicans and Democrats alike had reasons to dislike him for his involvement in publishing classified documents.
A Deal with the Justice Department:
After years in prison in Britain while fighting extradition to the United States, Assange pleaded guilty this week to violating the Espionage Act and was released from prison for time served in Britain. He was able to enter his plea agreement at a federal court in Saipan, a U.S. territory, and then fly directly to Australia.
Implications for Press Freedom:
Assange’s unpopularity means that few have viewed him as a martyr in the cause of press freedom. However, he is a victim of an abusive prosecution by a government seeking to silence whistleblowers, setting a dangerous precedent that could severely damage press freedom in the United States.
Unresolved Role in Journalism:
Assange’s role in journalism has never been fully resolved or accurately defined. WikiLeaks, the organization he co-founded, obtained documents from sources inside governments and other organizations and made them public, raising questions about his role as a journalist or intermediary.
Defining Journalism:
The Justice Department sought to define Assange’s role by declaring that he did not act as a legitimate journalist when interacting with whistleblowers. This precedent of allowing the government to define journalism could have far-reaching implications.
In conclusion, the case of Julian Assange highlights the complexities and challenges faced by journalists and whistleblowers in an era of increasing government scrutiny and prosecution. The outcome of his legal battle raises important questions about press freedom and the role of journalists in holding power to account.