Imagine comparing the rule of law in Russia & China to the rule of law in the United Stateshttps://twitter.com/benwizner/status/855175372715036676 …
-
-
its not a jurisdictional point. There simply is no question that the relevant statutes are prosecutable extraterritorially.
-
To be very clear: the substantive conduct we're discussing is the publication of another state's secrets.
-
I see. So you're assuming here that a hypothetical indictment of Assange would allege no more than publication?
-
My entire argument was based on that factual predicate, as is clear from the original tweet.
-
I agree with you that without more than publication, prosecution of Wikileaks would be a terrible idea. But not because of jurisdiction.
-
If we set a precedent that we can punish foreign publishers for exposing our secrets, it will come back to bite us.
-
remove the word "foreign" from that sentence, and I think you're argument will stand on more solid ground.
-
Of course I would agree with that statement, too. But I'm not sure why you don't see added danger here.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
If a New York Times reporter, say, conducted espionage against the UK from NY, the US would NEVER take the view that Britain cannot...
-
I'm saying we would never allow China to define the publication of their secrets as "espionage."
-
but what do you mean "allow"? They do precisely that, and we don't prevent it.
-
I mean we would cry bloody murder if China charged David Sanger with espionage under Chinese law.
-
I think we would make a substantive argument that the activity in question is protected speech.
-
or should be.
-
we don't believe they should be prosecuted and we're going to protect them if they want to stay here.
-
I wasn't trying to make a law professor argument about jurisdiction. I was trying to illustrate the danger of extraterritorial enforcement.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I'm bewildered by this argument. You are conflating a substantive free speech point with a jurisdictional point.
-
Is that addressed to me?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If your point is that there's no substantive difference between the NYT and Wikileaks for First Amendment purposes, that may be right, but
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.