The principle is true, people like Julian Assange who live outside of the USA and who are not Citizens of the United States do not have the 1st Amendment and other protective rights (4th Amendment, 5 Eyes spying…) and freedoms as Citizens and legal residents in the USA enjoy. (here’s a link to the case summary: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/19-177 and here is the summary New York Times v. United States 1971 famous Pentagon Papers case: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873) ___ Now let’s think of some distinctions as to why NY Times “Pentagon Papers” case might not be helpful in the case of Julian Assange. 1) Julian Assange is accused of hacking. That is like an intrusion, an attack. Generally there’s no 1st Amendment right to do that (when you hack to save the world, you do this at your own risk). National Constitution Center explains (https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-assange-indictment-and-the-first-amendment — note, they are not fully “based” yet, they still write as if Russia did the hacking of HRC and Democratic Party, but otherwise this is a good article) ****2) The Law of Specialty might apply (international law lawyers’ trick in Assange’s favor): but we don’t know yet, as the U.S. appellate court where Assange could be tried has not decided upon this “Law of Specialty” issue yet. a) It’s an international law treaty right and it limits countries from tacking on extra charges against an accused when the extradition process has begun. b) Other U.S. Appellate Courts are split, so this “right” is open for debate. 2) Not sure if U.S. and UK have signed a mutual agreement to this principle in extradition rights and / or other human rights treaties / systems like OAS Organization of American States (“Law of Specialty” is discussed in USA / Canadian relations here: https://open.library.ubc.ca/media/download/pdf/831/1.0077580/2 ). 3) When you hack to save the world, it’s an uphill battle, but this brings people of different political perspectives together and strengthens the cause of The Great Awakening.

The principle is true, people like Julian Assange who live outside of the USA and who are not Citizens of the United States do not have the 1st Amendment and other protective rights (4th Amendment, 5 Eyes spying…) and freedoms as Citizens and legal residents in the USA enjoy. (here’s a link to the case summary: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/19-177 and here is the summary New York Times v. United States 1971 famous Pentagon Papers case: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873) ___ Now let’s think of some distinctions as to why NY Times “Pentagon Papers” case might not be helpful in the case of Julian Assange. 1) Julian Assange is accused of hacking. That is like an intrusion, an attack. Generally there’s no 1st Amendment right to do that (when you hack to save the world, you do this at your own risk). National Constitution Center explains (https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-assange-indictment-and-the-first-amendment — note, they are not fully “based yet, they still write as if Russia did the hacking of HRC and Democratic Party, but otherwise this is a good article) ****2) The Law of Specialty might apply (international law lawyers’ trick in Assange’s favor): but we don’t know yet, as the U.S. appellate court where Assange could be tried has not decided upon this “Law of Specialty” issue yet. a) It’s an international law treaty right and it limits countries from tacking on extra charges against an accused when the extradition process has begun. b) Other U.S. Appellate Courts are split, so this “right” is open for debate. 2) Not sure if U.S. and UK have signed a mutual agreement to this principle in extradition rights and / or other human rights treaties / systems like OAS Organization of American States (“Law of Specialty” is discussed in USA / Canadian relations here: https://open.library.ubc.ca/media/download/pdf/831/1.0077580/2 ). 3) When you hack to save the world, it’s an uphill battle, but this brings people of different political perspectives together and strengthens the cause of The Great Awakening.

The principle is true, people like Julian Assange who live outside of the USA and who are not Citizens of the United States do not have the 1st Amendment and other protective rights (4th Amendment, 5 Eyes spying…) and freedoms as Citizens and legal residents in the USA enjoy. (here’s a link to the case summary: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/19-177 and here is the summary New York Times v. United States 1971 famous Pentagon Papers case: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873) ___ Now let’s think of some distinctions as to why NY Times “Pentagon Papers” case might not be helpful in the case of Julian Assange. 1) Julian Assange is accused of hacking. That is like an intrusion, an attack. Generally there’s no 1st Amendment right to do that (when you hack to save the world, you do this at your own risk). National Constitution Center explains (https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-assange-indictment-and-the-first-amendment — note, they are not fully “based yet, they still write as if Russia did the hacking of HRC and Democratic Party, but otherwise this is a good article) ****2) The Law of Specialty might apply (international law lawyers’ trick in Assange’s favor): but we don’t know yet, as the U.S. appellate court where Assange could be tried has not decided upon this “Law of Specialty” issue yet. a) It’s an international law treaty right and it limits countries from tacking on extra charges against an accused when the extradition process has begun. 2) Not sure if U.S. and UK have signed a mutual agreement to this principle in extradition rights and / or other human rights treaties / systems like OAS Organization of American States (“Law of Specialty” is discussed in USA / Canadian relations here: https://open.library.ubc.ca/media/download/pdf/831/1.0077580/2 ). 3) When you hack to save the world, it’s an uphill battle, but this brings people of different political perspectives together and strengthens the cause of The Great Awakening.

The principle is true, people like Julian Assange who live outside of the USA and who are not Citizens of the United States do not have the 1st Amendment and other protective rights (4th Amendment, 5 Eyes spying…) and freedoms as Citizens and legal residents in the USA enjoy. (here’s a link to the case summary: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/19-177 and here is the summary New York Times v. United States 1971 famous Pentagon Papers case: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873) ___ Now let’s think of some distinctions as to why NY Times “Pentagon Papers” case might not be helpful in the case of Julian Assange. 1) Julian Assange is accused of hacking. That is like an intrusion, an attack. Generally there’s no 1st Amendment right to do that (when you hack to save the world, you do this at your own risk). National Constitution Center explains (https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-assange-indictment-and-the-first-amendment — note, they are not fully “based yet, they still write as if Russia did the hacking of HRC and Democratic Party, but otherwise this is a good article) ****2) The Law of Specialty might apply (international law lawyers’ trick in Assange’s favor): but we don’t know yet, as the U.S. appellate court where Assange could be tried has not decided upon this “Law of Specialty” issue yet. a) It’s an international law treaty right and it limits countries from tacking on extra charges against an accused when the extradition process has begun. 2) Not sure if U.S. and UK have signed a mutual agreement to this principle in extradition rights and / or other human rights treaties / systems like OAS Organization of American States (“Law of Specialty” is discussed in USA / Canadian relations here: https://open.library.ubc.ca/media/download/pdf/831/1.0077580/2 )

The principle is true, people like Julian Assange who live outside of the USA and who are not Citizens of the United States do not have the 1st Amendment and other protective rights (4th Amendment, 5 Eyes spying…) and freedoms as Citizens and legal residents in the USA enjoy. (here’s a link to the case summary: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/19-177 and here is the summary New York Times v. United States 1971 famous Pentagon Papers case: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873) ___ Now let’s think of some distinctions as to why NY Times “Pentagon Papers” case might not be controlling in the case of Julian Assange. 1) Julian Assange is accused of hacking. That is like an intrusion, an attack. Generally there’s no 1st Amendment right to do that (when you hack to save the world, you do this at your own risk). National Constitution Center explains (https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-assange-indictment-and-the-first-amendment — note, they are not fully “based yet, they still write as if Russia did the hacking of HRC and Democratic Party, but otherwise this is a good article) ****2) The Law of Specialty might apply (international law lawyers’ trick in Assange’s favor): but we don’t know yet, as the U.S. appellate court where Assange could be tried has not decided upon this “Law of Specialty” issue yet. a) It’s an international law treaty right and it limits countries from tacking on extra charges against an accused when the extradition process has begun. 2) Not sure if U.S. and UK have signed a mutual agreement to this principle in extradition rights and / or other human rights treaties / systems like OAS Organization of American States (“Law of Specialty” is discussed in USA / Canadian relations here: https://open.library.ubc.ca/media/download/pdf/831/1.0077580/2 )

The principle is true, people like Julian Assange who live outside of the USA and who are not Citizens of the United States do not have the 1st Amendment and other protective rights (4th Amendment, 5 Eyes spying…) and freedoms as Citizens and legal residents in the USA enjoy. (here’s a link to the case summary: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/19-177 and here is the summary New York Times v. United States 1971 famous Pentagon Papers case: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873) ___ Now let’s think of some distinctions as to why this case might not be controlling in the case of Julian Assange. 1) Julian Assange is accused of hacking. That is like an intrusion, an attack. Generally there’s no 1st Amendment right to do that (when you hack to save the world, you do this at your own risk). National Constitution Center explains (https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-assange-indictment-and-the-first-amendment — note, they are not fully “based yet, they still write as if Russia did the hacking of HRC and Democratic Party, but otherwise this is a good article) ****2) The Law of Specialty might apply (international law lawyers’ trick in Assange’s favor): but we don’t know yet, as the U.S. appellate court where Assange could be tried has not decided upon this “Law of Specialty” issue yet. a) It’s an international law treaty right and it limits countries from tacking on extra charges against an accused when the extradition process has begun. 2) Not sure if U.S. and UK have signed a mutual agreement to this principle in extradition rights and / or other human rights treaties / systems like OAS Organization of American States (“Law of Specialty” is discussed in USA / Canadian relations here: https://open.library.ubc.ca/media/download/pdf/831/1.0077580/2 )