{"id":352061,"date":"2023-10-23T19:07:21","date_gmt":"2023-10-24T00:07:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/content.findlaw-admin.com\/ability-law\/criminal\/criminal-charges\/espionage.html"},"modified":"2025-05-28T19:07:00","modified_gmt":"2025-05-29T00:07:00","slug":"espionage","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.findlaw.com\/criminal\/criminal-charges\/espionage.html","title":{"rendered":"Espionage"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n \n
\n

Espionage<\/h1>\n
\n
\n By John Mascolo, Esq.<\/a> | Legally reviewed by FindLaw Staff<\/a>\n | Last updated\n
\n \n <\/i>\n Legally Reviewed\n <\/summary>\n\n
\n

This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy, clarity, and style by FindLaw\u2019s team of legal writers and attorneys<\/a> and in accordance with our editorial standards<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n\n

\n \n <\/i>\n Fact-Checked\n <\/summary>\n\n
\n

The last updated date refers to the last time this article was reviewed by FindLaw or one of our contributing authors<\/a>. We make every effort to keep our articles updated. For information regarding a specific legal issue affecting you, please contact an attorney in your area<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n<\/section>\n

\n

The federal crime of espionage seeks to punish those who share sensitive information that would be harmful to U.S. security interests. Yet, violations of the law can take many forms. Industrial espionage has increased in recent years, especially with the advance of technology.<\/p>\n\n <\/div>\n\n

Spies often appear in popular media as glamorous and sophisticated like James Bond. In reality, the crime of espionage involves a variety of circumstances and motives. The offender may not always work for a foreign power. The crime may involve the disclosure of classified documents for any unauthorized purpose.<\/p>\r\n

Read on to learn more about federal laws defining the crimes in this area. You can also get advice for a specific espionage case. Get a criminal defense attorney<\/a> who has experience with complex cases. <\/p>\r\n

Example Espionage Cases<\/h2>\r\n

The examples below show the types of situations that may lead to espionage charges.<\/p>\r\n

U.S. Military Files on WikiLeaks<\/h3>\r\n

Chelsea Manning was a private in the United States Army. She had access to classified and otherwise sensitive government documents, photographs, and videos. This included diplomatic correspondence, files from the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay, and various military reports. Sometimes, such sensitive information revealed higher than reported civilian deaths and other unsettling details in the operations of the U.S. military.
\r\n<\/p>\r\n

Manning said she found much of the information in these documents "profoundly troubling." Claiming she was acting as a whistleblower<\/a>, she leaked the files through the WikiLeaks platform in 2010. From there, much of this information became public through the mainstream media. There were more than 700,000 leaked files in all.<\/p>\r\n

Manning faced a military court martial in 2013. She pled to several offenses before trial. At trial, the military judge convicted her of further violations related to the massive leak. This included six counts of violating the Espionage Act<\/a> (18 U.S.C. Sections 792-799) for transmitting defense information. The judge did not convict her of aiding the enemy, which was the most serious charge she faced.<\/p>\r\n

Classified Documents in Mar-a-Lago<\/h3>\r\n

More recently, a federal grand jury indicted<\/a> then-former President Donald Trump for retaining classified documents and other top-secret defense information at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. The Attorney General appointed a special prosecutor to handle the case, which was before the federal district court in Florida.<\/p>\r\n

In 2023, the prosecution filed a total of 40 felony charges against the former president, 32 of which fell under espionage laws. Trump pled not guilty to all counts. There were many pre-trial developments, including delays and requests to dismiss the case.<\/p>\r\n

Ultimately, the criminal case never reached trial. The federal judge dismissed the case in a controversial decision. The prosecution had filed an appeal to continue the case. But after the 2024 election granting Trump a second presidential term, the prosecution dropped this appeal<\/a>. <\/p>\r\n

A Brief History of the Espionage Act<\/h2>\r\n

Soon after the United States entered World War I, Congress passed the Espionage Act<\/a> of 1917. This law prohibited sharing defense information intended to disrupt U.S. military interests or aid its enemies. It was punishable by up to 20 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. The Sedition Act<\/a> was passed the following year, reinforcing the Espionage Act by prohibiting the issuance of false statements intended to disrupt the war effort. In addition, it provided broad provisions that were eventually overturned (such as banning "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language" about the U.S.).<\/p>\r\n

Congress repealed the Sedition Act in 1921 due to its heavy-handed suppression of free speech. But while there have been many First Amendment challenges to the Espionage Act since its passage, it has remained largely intact.<\/p>\r\n

In Schenck v. U.S.<\/a><\/i> (1919), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the distribution of flyers urging draft-age men to resist military induction was not protected by the First Amendment. It may not seem like espionage in the classic sense. Still, the petitioner’s conviction was upheld as a violation of the Espionage Act due to the "clear and present danger" the conduct had of bringing about harms Congress had a right to prevent.<\/p>\r\n

The Elements of an Espionage Offense<\/h2>\r\n

As the Manning case illustrates, even those who leak or share sensitive government information without the intention of harming the United States may be found guilty of espionage. Manning insisted her intention was to expose sensitive government information as a whistleblower. She claimed she was disclosing bad conduct by others. Military prosecutors were not required to prove that she intended to harm the United States. Instead, they only had to show that Manning had (or should have had) reason to believe the information she shared could have<\/i> harmed U.S. interests.<\/p>\r\n

Generally, to obtain an espionage conviction requires U.S. prosecutors to prove all of the following elements:<\/p>\r\n