The Judge wrote: “The Director of Central Intelligence is free to disclose classified information about CIA sources and methods selectively...”
Yes, the CIA Director can disclose pretty much whatever he wants. But the issue in the case was whether once he has disclosed something to a particular reporter, he can still refuse to disclose that exact same thing to someone making a FOIA request. The CIA and Judge are of the view that even though the information has already been disclosed to a reporter, the public is still not entitled to see it. Makes zero sense to me.
Effectively, the argument is about whether:
a) a leak by the director effectively declassifies the information (so that anyone should be able to view it)
or
b) a leak by the director effectively grants some limited security clearance to the reporter (so that only they should be able to view it)
Since a leak to a reporter by its very nature implies that the information is to be disseminated, it makes more sense that scenario a is what is actually going on, but the judge seems to have chosen scenario b.