>> It's protected speech, just like when WaPo published the Pentagon papers Also not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the Pentagon Papers case was about

>> It's protected speech, just like when WaPo published the Pentagon papers Also not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the Pentagon Papers case was about "prior restraint", meaning the government tried to prevent the Washington Post from publishing the information. They still could have been charged under existing laws on distributing classified information after publishing, the government considered that but did not charge them. And prior restraint is not always prohibited, the courts just decided that in the Pentagon Papers case, it was not appropriate. Anyone involved in the leak in any way should only be talking to their lawyer right now.