Bill Overview
Title: Espionage Act Reform Act of 2022
Description: This bill limits the scope of certain criminal offenses relating to classified information. Under the bill, the offense of disclosing classified information to an unauthorized person may be committed only by an individual who is authorized to receive the classified information and has signed a nondisclosure agreement regarding such classified information (i.e., a covered person), whereas under current law any individual may be charged with this offense. Under the bill, this offense shall not apply to disclosures of information to any Member of Congress, a federal court, an inspector general in the intelligence community, or certain bodies such as the Federal Trade Commission. Similarly, under the bill, certain offenses related to gathering, transmitting, or losing defense information may be committed only by a covered person or a foreign agent, whereas currently such offenses may be committed by any person. Under the bill, an individual who is not a foreign agent may not be criminally charged for such offenses unless the individual meets certain requirements, such as having committed a felony under federal law in the course of committing the offense. An offense related to obtaining and copying a document connected with the national defense shall apply only to an unlawfully obtained nonpublic document, whereas the current statute does not limit the scope of this offense to such documents. An offense related to dispensing certain public property of value shall apply only to tangible things, whereas the current statute does not limit the scope of this offense to tangible things.
Sponsors: Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals involved with or handling classified information
Estimated Size: 500000
- The bill affects how criminal charges are applied under the Espionage Act which previously could be brought against any individual; now, it's limited to 'covered persons' and foreign agents.
- 'Covered persons' include individuals authorized to receive classified information who have signed a nondisclosure agreement.
- The reform implies impacts on government employees or contractors with security clearances, as well as foreign agents.
- Individuals who might disclose information concerning national security to Congress, federal courts, or specific oversight bodies are also impacted by reduced legal risk.
- The refinement of offenses related to national security documents means fewer individuals, like journalists or activists, could be inadvertently charged.
Reasoning
- The Espionage Act Reform Act of 2022 primarily affects individuals who interact with classified information, thus limiting the total population it impacts directly. Our simulated interviews will focus on those most likely to encounter these changes, including current or former government employees, contractors with security clearances, journalists, and activists.
- Given the budget constraint, the policy is likely to focus on administrative changes, training, or adjustments to legal defense mechanisms rather than direct financial assistance. Hence, the primary impact is on legal risk management rather than direct economic gains or losses.
- We have designed our interviews across a spectrum of individuals ranging from government officials to journalists to understand both direct and tangential impacts.
- Most 'ordinary' citizens might not perceive direct impacts. However, the overall legal climate and rights to information could tangentially influence public perception and trust in government processes.
Simulated Interviews
Government Employee (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel somewhat relieved as this reform reduces the risk of legal action if information is disclosed unintentionally or in a misunderstood context.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Freelance Journalist (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This reform seems positive and could potentially protect people like me from undue legal peril when reporting on sensitive subjects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Cybersecurity Contractor (Dallas, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy change provides clearer guidelines on what can and cannot be disclosed, which is crucial for my work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Civil Rights Activist (New York, NY)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might help prevent journalists and whistleblowers from facing unjust penalties, promoting more transparency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
Foreign Policy Analyst (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It adds protection for professionals in my field who might be loosely associated with cases of classified leaks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Federal Court Judge (Chicago, IL)
Age: 42 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This reform could significantly reduce overcriminalization for cases that don’t truly threaten national security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Consultant (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It brings a needed recalibration, ensuring individuals aren't unfairly targeted in the legal system.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Defense Attorney (Boston, MA)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This reform could potentially decrease the number of cases I handle, but it's critical for protecting civil liberties.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
University Professor (Houston, TX)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reform in this domain is critical for ensuring that the legal system is just and only targets genuine threats.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Tech Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I doubt this reform affects me directly, but it is reassuring to see efforts towards regulatory precision.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 5: $2500000 (Low: $1500000, High: $3500000)
Year 10: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 100: $100000 (Low: $50000, High: $150000)
Key Considerations
- Narrower legal scope for offenses may reduce misuse or over-prosecution under Espionage laws.
- Reduced complexity in legal proceedings as roles and responsibilities become clearer.
- Important to evaluate potential loopholes that might arise from the refinement of terms like 'covered persons'.
- Consider political implications of increasing transparency by allowing disclosures to certain government bodies without legal repercussions.