Last December, in the face of a presidential warning that they would compromise ongoing investigations of al Qaeda, the Times revealed the existence of an ultrasecret terrorist surveillance program of the National Security Agency and provided details of how it operated.
There is one very simple problem with any attempt to prosecute the New York Times for revealing this information. The existence of that "ultrasecret" NSA surveillance program was already known before the Times "revealed" it -- and was described in the formal press release issued by the U.S. Justice Department in 2003 involving the prosecution of Iyman Faris, the truck driver from Ohio who was charged with conspiring to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge and other landmarks.
I'd like someone to explain to me how the U.S. Justice Department could possibly prosecute anyone for "leaking" information under these circumstances.
"The existence of that "ultrasecret" NSA surveillance program was already known before the Times "revealed" it -- and was described in the formal press release issued by the U.S. Justice Department in 2003 involving the prosecution of Iyman Faris, the truck driver from Ohio who was charged with conspiring to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge and other landmarks."
I'm not familiar with the formal press release issued by the U.S. Justice Department in 2003, involving the prosecution of Lyman Faris - but I would assume that the information in that press release would have been vetted and declassified; whereas the NY Times article was a very long article containing many details that were classified.
One needs to do a comparison of the 2003 press release with the New York Times article in order to answer your question. Do you have a link to that Justice Department press release?