> First amendment doesn’t apply, because the U.S. doesn’t apply the bill of rights to non-citizens.

That's absolutely not true. Precedent has been set multiple times granting constitutional protections to anyone on US soil, no matter how they got here.

So sure, he isn't protected now, because he's not here, but the moment he lands on US soil he's protected by the first amendment. There is no way they would charge him if they didn't think it could stand up under the first amendment.

I am not a lawyer, and I'd love to hear from somebody who's a con law lawyer, but I'm not certain that the First Amendment is retroactive to activities that did not happen on American soil--and, going forward, it's completely within the government's power to get a gag order as pertains to an ongoing case.

> Precedent has been set multiple times granting constitutional protections to anyone on US soil, no matter how they got here

I doubt illegal aliens have 2nd Amendment rights on US soil.

I actually googled this because I had the same thought. According to this source [0], the bill of rights says "People" not "Citizens" so he would have the same protections.

[0] - https://www.maniatislawoffice.com/blog/2018/08/do-non-citize...

Second Amendment says "the right of the people", not "the right of the citizens", but I doubt Assange would be able to buy a gun in the US, even before all this.

Bill of rights covers anyone in USA.

Note the word “in”. Assange wasn’t and isn’t in the U.S.

There was a ruling in a different case yesterday that 1A applies even when the person charged is not in the US - under specific circumstances.

https://www.eff.org/de/deeplinks/2019/05/reddit-commenters-f...

Bill of rights doesn't apply to US citizens outside of US as well.

The Bill of Rights covers the US Government.