A decade ago, experts said I’d be the last reporter to face a subpoena in a leak investigation. How wrong they were
In 2015, after I won a seven-year battle with the federal government and refused its demands that I reveal my confidential sources for a story I wrote about a botched CIA operation, many media experts predicted that I would be the last journalist ever subpoenaed by the government in a leak investigation. They argued that new surveillance technology made it possible for the government to more readily identify sources inside the government without having to rely on the testimony of reporters. There was no longer any need for the government to go through the lengthy and bitter legal process of trying to haul reporters into court and threaten them with jail if they refused to reveal their sources.
Fast forward more than a decade, and it is obvious that those predictions from the experts were wrong. The notion that leak investigations are primarily designed to find leakers now seems quaint.
James Risen is a Pulitzer prize-winning journalist
