Sen. Rand Paul Proposes Dumping Entire Espionage Act
The law has been abused to prosecute citizens for reasons other than spying. But there are better examples than Trump to highlight problems.

In the midst of the raging political bonfire over the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago to find classified documents former President Donald Trump allegedly took with him when he left office, Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) proposed on Twitter Saturday the complete repeal of federal espionage laws.
"The espionage act was abused from the beginning to jail dissenters of WWI. It is long past time to repeal this egregious affront to the 1st Amendment," Paul wrote.
Paul's tweet links to a 2019 piece by libertarian Jacob G. Hornberger, founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation, noting the checkered and politicized past of the Espionage Act of 1917. Hornberger's piece is not directly about Trump but rather a response to the continued U.S. prosecution of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
Nevertheless, while Paul didn't explicitly mention Trump, his tweet can easily be linked to the debate over whether Trump could or should be subjected to prosecution for violating federal espionage law for mishandling classified documents.
Paul was traveling in Kentucky today and was unable to reply to a request from Reason for a comment.* However, he was asked about his tweet during a stop, and his office emailed Reason a partial audio clip of his response. He explained that for a good chunk of history the Espionage Act was used to arrest and jail anti-war advocates and socialists during World War I, and even though he was no fan of socialists, he supported their right to free speech.
"We have had people who have been whistleblowers," Paul continued. "Probably the most well-known whistleblower we've had is Edward Snowden.… He showed people that the American government was breaking the law, that they were retrieving all of our information. And so for a long time, I thought the Espionage Act is something that could be used to stifle dissent and freedom of speech."
Paul has been a longtime critic of how federal surveillance and espionage laws are misused to target American citizens for inappropriate purposes. Still, calling for the entire repeal of the Espionage Act seems to be new ground for Paul. When Snowden fled to Russia to avoid potential arrest and prosecution for leaking classified evidence showing that the National Security Agency was secretly collecting the communications metadata of U.S. citizens, Paul stopped short of praising Snowden as a big hero, though he appreciated the information that Snowden brought to light. In an interview with Reason in 2015, Paul said that Snowden should face some sort of punishment for breaking the Espionage Act, stopping far short of fellow Republicans (and Trump) who accused the whistleblower of treason.
Both Paul's and Trump's opinions on Snowden changed in 2020 after the president's own experiences with federal surveillance. Trump flirted with the idea of pardoning Snowden, and Paul openly supported it, reversing his former position. Ultimately, Trump would leave office without extending the pardon, leaving Snowden to become a Russian citizen rather than return home.
Under Trump, whistleblower Reality Winner was prosecuted and sentenced to prison under the Espionage Act for passing along to the press classified documents detailing how Russian hackers attempted to break into U.S. election systems in 2016 to potentially manipulate the outcome. The documents did not implicate Trump or his campaign in any way. Regardless, there isn't an exception in the Espionage Act for leaks that are in the public interest.
Whistleblower Daniel Hale was also arrested and prosecuted during the Trump administration for leaking documents showing how the U.S was killing innocent civilians overseas with drone strikes. He is currently serving a 45-month sentence. We may believe that the purpose of the Espionage Act is to fight foreign spies, but its scope is much broader and thus deserving of criticism.
The Washington Post noted last week that Trump signed into law in 2018 a bill that increased the potential sentence for the absconding of classified material from a maximum of one year to five years. The Winner prosecution and Trump's approval of harsher penalties under the Espionage Act perhaps can be seen as evidence that Trump wants more special treatment for himself than the presidency actually allows.
While Paul hasn't spoken much about the prosecution of Winner and Hale (his official website comes up blank with any reference to their names), he did vote against the above bill that Trump signed. His opposition to harsher Espionage Act penalties shows that there's some consistency in his positions.
Consistency aside, though, there's absolutely zero chance that the Espionage Act will be repealed as a whole. It's very likely that most Americans want the federal government to be able to prosecute spies that provide or sell state secrets to foreign governments.
But the bill can be reformed to restrain some of the awful excesses. In fact, a small group of lawmakers is attempting to do so right now, adjusting it so that it does not apply to journalists and will allow whistleblowers to turn to government officials to point out abuses without risking prosecution.
The bill has been introduced in the Senate by Sen. Ron Wyden (D–Ore.), who has worked with Paul before in attempting to rein in the government's surveillance authorities. Paul is not currently listed as a co-sponsor of the Espionage Act Reform Act of 2022, nor did he co-sponsor the version of the bill Wyden introduced in 2020.
*This post has been updated with comments from Paul on the road in Kentucky explaining further why he believes the Espionage Act should be repealed.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
So, it's a bad law...but not when it comes to Trump.
Exactly.
It’s beyond comical at this point
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even realisable but my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best (aim-20) assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
---------->>> https://googlechoice.netlify.app
How about a Congressional compromise? Democrats will support repealing the espionage act if Republicans will support a law that declares Trump's very existence as illegal.
It would be moke the 1986 amnesty deal and they would lie after the gop did their part.
Nice one
It is amazing how many times the word Trump appears in an article with a topic unrelated to him.
Well, TDS is terminal. Funny how stage 5 TDS patients just cannot stop bringing up Trump. It's truly a disease.
He’s under their bed. He’s in their head!
I just worked part-time from my apartment for 5 weeks, but I made $30,030. I lost my former business and was soon worn out. Thank goodness, I found this employment online and I was able to start working from home right away. (res-20) This top career is achievable by everyone, and it will improve their online revenue by:.
.
After reading this article:>>> https://googleservice045.netlify.app/
It's not unrelated. Duh
Scott "the groomer" is taking the but trump approch
That’s the new reality around here.
I just worked part-time from my apartment for 5 weeks, but I made $30,030. I lost my former business and was soon worn out. Thank goodness, I found this employment online and I was able to start working from home right away. (res-25) This top career is achievable by everyone, and it will improve their online revenue by:.
.
After reading this article:>>>
any other day Reason would be against the Espionage act but not today
Nevertheless, while Paul didn't explicitly mention Trump, his tweet can easily be linked to the debate over whether Trump could or should be subjected to prosecution for violating federal espionage law for mishandling classified documents.
Followed by
Paul's office did not respond to an email Monday asking to follow up with the senator about his tweet. But Paul has been a longtime critic of how federal surveillance and espionage laws are misused to target American citizens for inappropriate purposes.
So he did it to protect trump even though he is a long time critic of it. What the fuck.
The TDS has rotted Scott’s brains out.
Shackford never had any
You mean Monkeypox, no?
That too.
Paul didn't respond and we can't judge him by his actions but his Tweet can be easily linked to Trump's handling of documents.
Also, we found a Tweet from a former FBI Agent saying that Trump's use of telepathy to declassify documents is unconscionable.
This is
CNNReason.I mean, if you're talking about the espionage act right now, I don't care who you are, I'll make the bet that it has something to do with the recent Trump related incident.
But so what? Paul seems to have been moving in the same (right) direction on this consistently for a while. It's not like he suddenly switched so he could defend Trump or something.
This is what is so infuriating about Reason's coverage. Of course it is going to come up during this Trump stuff. But to sit there and clear their throat for paragraphs when it is obvious that Rand has been good on this subject for eons is just silly.
Thing is if he'd brought it up without any context to drive up support no one would be talking about it. Moat whistle blowers don't trigger support for real but rather harsher punishments. When it's potentially weilded against a popular narcissistic moron it's a different story.
^Literally cancer
I can’t wait for Jeff and sarc to get in here and start carrying water for this abomination
Poor sarc. He never quite understands what Jeff has him supporting.
I have it on good authority from other stories in the MSM that Rand Paul only is proposing this because he is a Putin agent.
Seriously I read that.
I'm sure Paul is also racist, patriarchal, and a privileged white oppressor. Just ask Maddow.
He won’t even Say Her Name
The left's current talking point is that this proves Paul a fascist.
Story, or an editorial?
...in the confiscated papers?
Good idea. One less law available to be misused by the corrupt leftists. Of course if the Republicans would grow a spine and use the laws to prosecute actual crimes committed by this regime, they would be less inclined to do it again if they have the chance. But that assumes a modicum of integrity, so probably not. Best to make sure they don't get the opportunity again.
What Republicans can prosecute this administration?
Active resistance. The doj was nothing but antagonistic and people in d.c. refusing to follow his lawful orders. D.c. is 90% democrat. It is captured.
Passive resistance is the way.
If enough people withhold consent
the regime will fall.
They will seize bank accounts
The rule of banks is the same as the rule of crypto: only put in what you can afford to lose.
Yep.
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/countering-the-control-crisis
I’m a cat person. Some of my friends call me a cat whisperer because of my ability to quickly befriend felines. This astounds people who don’t understand the first (maybe only?) rule of cats:
If you treat them poorly, they’re perfectly happy never dealing with you ever again.
No muss, no fuss, no fanfare. With the possible exception of some poop in your shoe, you might not even know the cat has written you off. You might be walking around your house a month later and suddenly think, “Hey, didn’t I have a cat?”
This is also the optimal strategy when dealing with the control crisis — simply cease consenting to be ruled by idiots.
And yet the article cites examples of the Trump admin prosecuting people under the law and you're evidently fine with it. Are they not corrupt rightists?
If you can't understand the difference between Winner and Hale's leaks and Snowden's whistleblowing, you're an idiot.
Snowden whistleblew about actual criminal lawbreaking being perpetrated against Americans by federal agencies. He didn't just leak about some very ugly but ultimately legal secrets like the others.
One man's leak is another man's whistleblowing. It's about whose ox is gored - as usual.
The difference is one made Obama and that lying piece of shit Brennan look bad.
Again the narrative is fully in force at Reason. It took a few days to get complete buy in from all of the editors. Maybe uncle Charles was on vacation and didn't get the email out for a while. But no matter what libertarianism or simple logic dictate Reason will create a carve out for Trump. In any case, Rand Paul typically does more for liberty on a slow Tuesday afternoon than Reason can manage in a year. Except for food trucks of course. Can't trust a US senator that's not fully on board with food trucks.
Food Trucks with sex workers
(beware the hot grease)
You forgot pot. Assuming the sex workers operate out of sleazy motels, I think we’ve got a potential roach put in here somewhere
Just curious, as a real registered Libertarian and not a Republican who occasionally pretends he's one (Rand Paul), what has he actually *accomplished* lately "for liberty"? Or should I wait until tomorrow, a "slow Tuesday afternoon"?
As a libertarian are you aware of the structure of Congress and who is in the White House?
Shrike's not a libertarian.
The bill to allow people to make their own groups and be able to purchase health insurance across state lines comes to mind.
Waiting for what Bill Weld ever did. And Rand did stop Obama's commie boy Brennan from droning Americans in America.
I've never joined your glorious party even though I spent years hanging out with Ls. The party was just too silly to actually join. But I voted Libertarian in every presidential and senate race starting with Harry Browne in 1996. Yeah I voted for Bill Weld thanks to you assholes. In 2020 I voted for Trump. First Republican I ever voted for. What exactly the fuck did big L libertarians do about the Covidians destroying the livelihoods of millions of people? Jack fucking shit. You were too busy advertising your collective wokeness to give a shit about liberty. Meanwhile Rand Paul was putting Fauci under oath and exposing him for the criminal he is. I would vote for Rand Paul in any jurisdiction I had the opportunity to. The Libertarian comedy sideshow has been nothing but a waste of my time. As far as I know Rand Paul doesn't pretend to be a "libertarian". I don't call myself a libertarian any more because you assholes changed the definition just like assholes that came before changed the definition of liberal.
Your namesake was murdered as a child by Bolsheviks. The Russians have her DNA. The Disney fantasy about this child is no more ridiculous than the fantasy that the Libertarian Party is anything other than an insignificant clownshow. Maybe the Mises Caucus can save your sorry asses but I'm not hopeful. In the meantime fuck off asshole.
Since you're a registered Libertarian, one might simply ask what the Libertarian party has ever accomplished themselves.
If you want to play that particular game, it's a bit ludicrous to start off with being a registered Libertarian. I'm one too, but I'm forced to notice they never win which means they never do anything but talk.
The LP got the Supreme Court to strike down girl-bullying Comstock Laws in 1973. Since then there has been no conscription. Growth of the federal drone payroll went from increasing to decreasing and leaf prohibition is being repealed, all with law-repealing LP spoiler vote clout. Our spoiler votes--despite infiltration from anarcho-commies and anarcho-fascists--kept totalitarian madmen from attacking the Bill of Rights. Our nuclear arsenal does the same thing, though rarely have we had occasion to actually nuke a collection of force-initiating fanatics.
Hi Hank!
Rand Paul never claimed to be a libritarian. Ron Paul, his dad did
He did a good job whispering in Trump's ear regarding aggressive foreign policy favored by the likes of Lindsey Graham. There was a real battle over that early in the Trump years and Rand won out for the most part.
He also did his part in pushing back against the liberty killing, national covid response.
Rand Paul is not the libertarian that his father is, Ron Paul. He kind of a hodgepodge of Republican, populist, with some dash of libertarianism. You can appreciate the dash of libertarianism but is it any more than you would find in a number of Democrats?
Randal blames Wilson's Federal Reserve System--not Republican laws making beer, wine, enjoyables and spirits into felonies enforceable by tax liabilities and asset forfeiture--for the Crash and Depression. Helping Christian National Socialism dodge causation for that implies girl-bullying Republicans are financial geniuses deserving of another chance to properly ban birth control, marijuana, trade and production and bring back Blue Laws.
No surprise here. Reason Editors are far left progressives. I keep saying it and they keep proving me right. When you understand that Reason Editors are not Libertarians, everything here makes perfect sense.
Well their top priorities are..open borders, abortion, grooming, and pot. I'm fine with the last one but the rest are not definitions of libertarians..just wanna be cool kids invited to the next wapo or salon party in DC.
Food trucks man. Everybody forgets the food trucks.
You forgot the weed and butt sex.
The libertarian movement solved those problems. These days libertarians can freely smoke dope while fucking each other in the ass. But is there a readily available food truck parked outside when they get hit by the munchies? Until this problem is solved all of the dope and ass sex in the world will not make us free.
Let's see if I read this right. Rand Paul was really defending Trump when he made a tweet about the Espionage Act in reference to a piece about Julian Assange, and his failure to respond to the accusation is proof of intent and guilt?
The TDS is strong with Shackford.
"I know it in my heart. I know it in my spirit. He has never lied about anything." --InsaneTrollLodgeit outside Mar-a-Lago
Why would a girl-bullying Republican defend a girl-bullying Republican?
IRS Report Shows Heavily Armed Agents Simulate Assault On Suburban Home
https://valiantnews.com/2022/08/irs-report-shows-heavily-armed-agents-simulate-assault-on-suburban-home/
Your boy Scott. Can you say police state?
Also telling how rand Paul has literally brought this up multiple time, I'm pretty sure he mentioned ending it in the reason interview with him back in the day (which was a Tuesday). But reason just now remembers that the guy who has been for criminal justice reform all his life is now for criminal justice reform
Well he isnt DA Gascon thats for sure. So dreamy.
Btw tell me how 2020 had a 1% sig rejection rate but the recall petition rejected 27% of signatures.
I am amazed that with the most mail-in ballots ever...the fail rate on them dropped so far below normal parameters in 2020.
It doesn’t matter who casts the votes…
...
…
" . . . adjusting it so that it does not apply to journalists . . . "
That is not adjusting; that is creating a special class of citizens in direct conflict with each and every concept of "equal justice under the law".
Reason editors think they are journolists. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Nitpicky the Reason cosmo lefties are. Instead of saying "bravo Senator Paul"..it is always a backhanded compliment. Now if it was Wyden (oh he was mentioned)..a glowing or at least factual statements without the condescending bullshit Reason has for the Pauls and the non-woke cosmo libertarians (you know the real libertarians). And who let Eugene Debbs out of prison? Yep..Warren G. Harding..perhaps one of the best presidents we had in his short time in office in the 20th century.
Jared Polis is so dreamy
It should be thrown out because it violates the first amendment. They would of had to amend the constitution to have ever made the espionage act constitutional.
Hoping Trump can drag these motherfuckers into the Supreme Court. Of course Reason will characterize that as Republicans trounce.
Maybe even an insurrection.
https://www.skynews.com.au/world-news/global-affairs/who-to-rename-monkeypox-amid-racial-connotation-concerns/video/b2249caae2fbb04fdad22d3f571543a6
It's official now. The World Health Organization thinks black people look like monkeys.
So what does Rand Paul think should replace the Espionage Act? Or does he think that foreign governments should get a free pass to steal our country's national security secrets?
Because the espionage act as worked so well.
But you could read his statement and the fact he says it is used politically and not consistently.
We already have 18 U.S.C. 798 to cover disclosure of classified information. How many national security secrets does the nation have that aren't classified?
I was going to say….was actual espionage against the US government legal before the Wilson administration saved us?
For that Randal'd have to join the anarcho-Mises caucus of the smaller, harder, angrier Republican party.
Minneapolis teachers union demands racial discrimination.
https://alphanews.org/minneapolis-teachers-union-contract-calls-for-layoffs-of-white-teachers-first/
Keep in mind that even if we got rid of 18 USC 793, we would still have 18 USC 798. The difference is that the letter is specifically about classified information whereas the former is about national defense information that could be used to harm the US. I believe that 793 came into existence before we had our current classification system. 798 should have superceded 793 once we got a classification system, as it is far more specific, less vague, and less open to abuse.
So how does "less open to abuse" benefit The looter Kleptocracy?
This strikes me as smart politics. With the right currently enraged about the raid of Trump's papers, Republican interests might finally be aligned with Paul. It doesn't require any sympathy of Trump on Paul's part to play to that moment. (I make no claims about what Paul actually feels about Trump).
So "the Brotherhood of Positive Christian Girl-Bulliers doesn't even enter the picture" sorta goes without saying, right?
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even realisable but my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best (aim-20) assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.. https://oldprofits.blogspot.com/
“Rural deplorables had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with enlightened liberals, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which any liberal person was bound to respect; and that the deplorable might justly and lawfully be reduced to disenfranchised serfdom for his benefit.”
Trump is the arch-deplorable, so things that would be abuse of the Espionage Act when applied to decent liberal people are not abuse when applied against evil deplorable unpersons like him.
(R-Ky)??! Did Scott really say Trumpista Randal Paul is REPUBLICAN of Kentucky? Like Daddy Paul the girl-bullying Libertarian impersonator was REPUBLICAN of Texas??! But the entire Christianofascist to anarchofascist spectrum of the screeching commentariat has for a decade peppered its cant with "libertarians like Gary Johnson and Ron Paul" or "inspiring Pro-Life libertarians like Robert Dear and Dave Smith." So what's the deal?