← Back to context

Comment by NaomiLehman

5 months ago

I'm gonna steelman an argument I don't hold: What about CIA? Revealing the identity of a CIA operative is a crime.

I'm just responding to the part "Don't they serve us?"

> Intentionally disclosing the identity of a U.S. intelligence agent, including a CIA officer, is a federal crime under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA), which can result in up to 10 years in prison and fines. This law applies to individuals with authorized access to classified information and those without access who intentionally expose agents, knowing their actions could harm U.S. foreign intelligence operations.

11 comments

NaomiLehman

Reply
ratelimitsteve  5 months ago

But intelligence and law enforcement aren't the same thing, and the CIA is specifically prohibited from operating domestically. Valiant attempt, but talking about law enforcement (again, as opposed to intelligence) activities that take place in public is a matter of settled law. We decided that you're allowed to warn people that the police are around, even if it will help people get away with crimes, as a first amendment matter when we decided that police can't make it illegal for you to flash your lights at an oncoming driver to warn them (https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/headlight-flashing/). There's no steelman for this, Apple is just trying to preemptively comply with an administration that considers civil rights inconvenient.

angry_octet  5 months ago

Revealing the identity of a CIA officer is not a crime unless you hold/held a clearance or it is part of a 'pattern of activities' designed to reveal such identities. Regular people have freedom of speech.

Such a law protecting ICE would not withstand scrutiny by the courts.

Crushable-E  5 months ago

I mean sure, but ICE is not an intelligence agency or holds classified information.

  • throwawaylaptop  5 months ago

    They're some kind of law enforcement agency that is on a mission to capture people breaking laws.

    If your local sheriff is on their way to serve a warrant of some kind, and you call the person and warn them to leave or alert them to destroy evidence, is that going to go well? I don't think it should.

    • nxobject  5 months ago

      The analogy doesn't quite match up –

      – Parent is talking about making public the identities of ICE employees, doing things in public, which is by far and large true of your local sheriff;

      - Individuals are reporting the presence of ICE in the area. A deliberate ambiguity is maintained about what ICE does beyond "detain people" -- whether as "collateral damage" or targeted. Intervening with the two gives us two very different circumstances.