Interesting. Could you explain that more?
So even possessing the appropriate clearance level doesn't give you the right to just start reading anything that interests you on a classified network. You're supposed to have a "need to know" in case you're questioned about it.
We always get stuff here (contractor on AFB) about "don't read this or that" or else you could be in trouble. But I've never heard of anyone actually getting in trouble.
Jokes aside, I found myself on the site for the first time ever last week... Didn't want to fuck with that shit during my service or while holding a clearance. But question... While I no longer have a clearance, I am still eligible for a clearance if I need it within the next few years... Should I be concerned?
Congress cannot prohibit speech or press. If it has been written down or spoken, then the US Constitution provides absolute legal justification for viewing it, copying it, and discussing it, without any restriction.
There is a caveat to the legality of classified materials, usually you must have been "entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of". Which alludes to the fact that you would first have to have been read in, or taken the material that you knew was classified.
There is also a "requirement" to "knowingly" cause harm. I put these in quotes because the wording and the enforcement of that requirement has been in flux and selective. Also relevant is that gross negligence would also meet the requirement.
I guess a creative prosecutor could challenge that visiting wikileaks would be knowingly removing the material from the server, but it would probably be beyond difficult to meet all of the guidelines for prosecution.
That being said. If you do currently hold a clearance, visiting Wikileaks is a violation of your NDA/ReadIn, Employment Agreement, and the UCMJ for service members.