Simply read the amendment and look at past interpretations of it.
In the Pentagon Papers case, the Supreme Court's decision included this: "Both the history and language of the First Amendment support the view that the press must be left free to publish news whatever the source, without censorship, injunctions, or prior restraint." http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB48/decision.pdf
There is no claim, however, that LEAKERS are not subject to prosecution.
If I want the other amendments (religion, guns, etc) interpreted strictly, then I must do the same with the press.)
"
Simply read the amendment and look at past interpretations of it. "
Nice try.
The legal eagles at Powerline have gone all over that.
No one is above the law, whether they work for the Slimes or not.
Giving national security secrets to the enemies of America is treason, even if you do it through the front pages of The Slimes.
From Hugh Hewitt:
"Again, I quote McManus to Baquet:
HH: Sure. Do you agree, Doyle McManus, that the press has no exemption from the national security statutes?
DM:
I do agree with that."
McManus btw, is the Los Angeles Times Washington Bureau.
http://www.hughhewitt.com/
From Dr. John Eastman, Director of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, testified Friday, May 26, before a hearing conducted by the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence "
"Eastman contended that the First Amendment's Freedom of Press clause does not provide the institutional media a special exemption from the Espionage Act and other laws, and that enforcement of those laws is particularly important in the present assymetrical war against international terrorist organizations. A copy of his prepared testimony is available here."
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=905167
"
In the Pentagon Papers case, the Supreme Court's decision included this: ""Both the history and language of the First Amendment support the view that the press must be left free to publish news whatever the source, without censorship, injunctions, or prior restraint." "
The US Supreme Court also recognised these:
Abstract:
"Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, contending that Section 798 of the Espionage Act, prohibiting the publication of classified information regarding U.S. communications capabilities, can constitutionally be applied to the media, for several reasons:
1) A majority of the Justices in the Pentagon Papers case recognized that prior restraints on publication of highly sensitive, classified information regarding ongoing military and communications operations would be permissible; 2) The prospect of post-publication liability for violating the Espionage Act was also recognized by a majority of the Justices; and 3) the Freedom of Press Clause of the First Amendment is equally applicable to citizens and the the institutional media. "