„The entire public discussion about prosecuting Assange has been neurotically fixated on the First Amendment, as if that matters. Is Assange a »journalist«? What kind of journalist? Who is a »journalist« in the world of the Internet?
Assange's lawyer, naturally, wraps his client in the First Amendment, saying Assange »is entitled to First Amendment protection as publisher of WikiLeaks.«
Even Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who wants Assange prosecuted - bless her patriotic Democratic heart - has responded to Assange's free speech defense by saying, »But he is no journalist: He is an agitator intent on damaging our government, whose policies he happens to disagree with, regardless of who gets hurt.«
All this is completely irrelevant. (...)
The government isn't trying to put a prior restraint on Assange's publication of the documents, as in the Pentagon Papers case (though it probably could have). It wouldn't be punishing Assange for his opinions. The government wouldn't be prosecuting Assange to force him to give up his sources - and not only because we already know who his source is (a gay guy in »an awkward place«), but because it simply doesn't matter.
Assange would be prosecuted for committing the crime of possessing and releasing classified national security documents that could do this country harm. The First Amendment has no bearing whatsoever on whether Assange has committed this particular crime, so whether or not Assange is a »journalist« is irrelevant.”