Podcast Summary: "Click Here" – The Law That Couldn’t Keep a Secret

Host: Dina Temple-Raston
Guest Expert: Stephen Vladeck (Georgetown Law Professor)
Date: November 7, 2025

Episode Overview

This episode of "Click Here" explores the origins, evolution, and current controversies surrounding the Espionage Act—a century-old law originally designed to prosecute spies and saboteurs but now wielded against whistleblowers, leakers, and increasingly, the press. Through expert commentary and historical anecdotes, host Dina Temple-Raston investigates how a law written in World War I has become a broad tool for national security crackdowns, raising urgent questions about free speech, journalism, and the dangers of unchecked governmental power.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Introduction to the Espionage Act and Reality Winner’s Case

• Reality Winner Context: The episode revisits the 2017 prosecution of Reality Winner, an Air Force linguist jailed for leaking a classified document about Russian election interference.
• Espionage Act's Breadth:

  “The Reality Winner case should be understood as part of a series of cases where the government over the last 15 years has really thrown the book at folks who in other times might have been viewed as whistleblowers.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (00:46)

2. Unintended Consequences: From Traitors to Texting

• Vague Language and Prosecution Power:

  “The problem with the Espionage Act is that you don’t even have to solicit the leak to be guilty under the statute. … The statute makes it a crime for someone sitting at home to open up the New York Times or to listen to this podcast and know that they’re reading or hearing information related to the national defense.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (01:19)

• Journalists at Risk:

  “That led a lot of folks to worry that journalists who are the recipients of national security leaks might be next.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (01:57)

3. History and Evolution of the Espionage Act

• Origins: Requested by President Woodrow Wilson in 1917 to fight wartime espionage and sabotage.

  “It was written at a time when Congress would address those kinds of problems with a sledgehammer, not with a scalpel.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (05:13)

• Rare Use Until the 1970s:

  • 1938: Used against Soviet spy Mihal Goren.
  • Pentagon Papers (1971): First major use against a leaker (Daniel Ellsberg), not a spy (06:13–06:51).

• Landmark Shift—Samuel Morrison Case (1985):

  “Even though the statute’s called the Espionage Act, it really doesn’t matter whether your intent is to steal information for the purposes of benefiting a foreign power. All that matters is whether the thing you stole might benefit a foreign power.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (07:42)

4. Leak Prosecutions, Journalists, and the Expanding Net

• Expanding Scope:

  • Early 2000s: Fresh concern as the Bush administration signals willingness to prosecute journalists (08:10–08:45).
  • U.S. v. Rosen (2005): Private citizens prosecuted for sharing information with an ally, previewing potential use against the press (09:09–09:43).

• Media Anxiety:

  “We really started to see, not just for the first time, concerted worry about the scope of the statute, but also fear, I think, on the part of media organizations that the government had the power to leverage the capaciousness of the statute against, you know, whistleblowers, leakers, journalists, what have you.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (09:43)

5. Obama & Trump Administrations: From Whistleblowers to Reporters

• Obama Era:

  • More leak prosecutions than all previous administrations combined.
  • James Risen Subpoena: First Amendment invoked, but Supreme Court sidesteps issue (11:49–12:48).

• Legal Uncertainty:

  “There are incredibly powerful arguments that … traditional news gathering is protected by the First Amendment … but … the Supreme Court has never recognized that.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (12:14)

• Trump Era: Heightened rhetoric and policy shifts:

  • Trump calls for reporters to reveal sources (14:08).
  • Rolling Stone reports Trump considered charging the press under the Espionage Act.
  • DOJ reverses limits on searching reporter devices, Pentagon increases surveillance of journalists (15:12–15:31).

  “This administration is also not big into nuance when it comes to prosecuting those with whom it disagrees... [it] would be only too quick to vilify the reporter who’s in the middle of a big national security leak.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (14:34)

6. Chilling Effect and Ongoing Uncertainty

• Intensified Risk for Journalists & Whistleblowers:

  “We have a statute that just doesn’t draw the kind of distinctions that it should, and that in not drawing those distinctions, gives the government an awful lot of leverage over people who might fancy themselves whistleblowers, over reporters who may not be so careful when it comes to how they handle and how they receive national security information.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (16:19)

• Calls for Reform (Congress repeatedly considers but never enacts meaningful changes):

  “Every 10 or 15 years, Congress wakes up and decides that it’s time to reform the Espionage Act... But Congress never fixes it. Until it does.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (16:57)

7. Future Outlook: Heightened Dangers

• Advice to Newsrooms:

  “Reporters and news organizations should be bracing for more aggressive use of the Espionage Act than we’ve ever seen before—more aggressive use against leakers, more aggressive use against journalists, and frankly, more aggressive use against anyone in between.”
  — Stephen Vladeck (17:34)

• Host Warning:

  “When secrecy and transparency collide, it isn’t always spies who get caught in the crossfire. Sometimes it’s the people trying to tell the rest of us what’s really going on.”
  — Dina Temple-Raston (18:47)

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• "The statute makes it a crime for someone sitting at home to open up the New York Times or to listen to this podcast and know that they're reading or hearing information related to the national defense."
  — Stephen Vladeck, 01:19

• "Every new leak and every administration’s response becomes a test case in real time."
  — Dina Temple-Raston, 12:48

• "Congress never fixes it. Until it does."
  — Stephen Vladeck, 17:12

• "When secrecy and transparency collide, it isn’t always spies who get caught in the crossfire."
  — Dina Temple-Raston, 18:47

Important Timestamps

| Time | Segment | |------------|--------------------------------------------------------| | 00:46 | Introduction to the Reality Winner case and its context | | 04:46 | Origins of the Espionage Act | | 06:13 | Pentagon Papers and Nixon’s response | | 07:29 | Samuel Morrison leak prosecution and precedent | | 09:09 | U.S. v. Rosen and prosecuting non-government recipients| | 11:35 | Prosecutions during Obama administration | | 12:14 | Limits of First Amendment protection for journalists | | 13:31 | Trump era leak and press crackdown | | 15:31 | Surveillance and scrutiny of journalists | | 16:57 | Congressional attempts at Espionage Act reform | | 17:34 | Forecasted risks for the press and whistleblowers | | 18:47 | Closing warning on secrecy vs. transparency |

Tone and Style

The episode is clear and accessible, avoiding technical jargon while building a sense of mounting urgency about how a vague, century-old law threatens both whistleblowers and the free press. Dina Temple-Raston and Stephen Vladeck combine legal expertise with historical storytelling and plainspoken warnings, making the stakes readily understandable for listeners beyond the cybersecurity world.

For further listening:
Check out more episodes of "Click Here" and explore news on cybersecurity and intelligence at The Record by Recorded Future News.