Judge Dismisses Espionage Act Case Against Ashley Tellis
WASHINGTON — A federal judge in Virginia has dismissed an Espionage Act case against Indian-American strategic affairs scholar Ashley J. Tellis after finding that prosecutors charged him under the wrong statutory provision.
U.S. District Judge Michael S. Nachmanoff granted Tellis’ motion to dismiss on April 16 after hearing arguments in Alexandria, Virginia. The order dismissed the case without prejudice, meaning prosecutors may be able to bring charges again.
Tellis, a scholar of international security and U.S. foreign policy, had been charged under Section 793(e) of the Espionage Act with willful retention of national defense information. Prosecutors alleged he removed and stored classified documents at his home while serving in senior positions connected to the U.S. State Department and the Department of Defense.
A superseding indictment accused Tellis of retaining 11 classified documents containing national defense information. Prosecutors alleged that he “exploited his access to classified information related to the national defence by secreting NDI from his secure workplaces and storing said NDI at his personal residence in hard copy and digital form.”
Tellis’ lawyers argued that prosecutors used the wrong subsection of the Espionage Act. They said Section 793(e) applies only to people in “unauthorised possession” of classified information, while the indictment itself acknowledged that Tellis held a high-level security clearance and had been “entrusted” with access to sensitive material.
The defense argued that Tellis “was entrusted with the relevant documents” and therefore could not legally fall under the provision cited by prosecutors.
His lawyers also said the government had not accused Tellis of disseminating classified information or accessing files beyond his clearance authority.
The defense filing said prosecutors could have pursued other statutes, including Section 793(d) or Section 1924, which covers unauthorized removal and retention of classified material by government employees, but “deliberately chose to limit its indictment to the wrong provision.”
Federal prosecutors had opposed efforts earlier in the case to ease Tellis’ strict bail conditions. In one filing, the government argued that Tellis remained a flight risk and a danger to national security because he allegedly possessed “tens of thousands of pages of classified material, including over 1,000 pages of hard-copy TOP SECRET material.”
The government also alleged that some of the material involved information related to China’s nuclear and military capabilities and said Tellis retained “decades’ worth of sensitive national defence information in his head.”
After the dismissal, Tellis filed an unopposed motion seeking release of his secured bond, which prosecutors did not contest. A separate court order later directed the government to respond to Tellis’ motion seeking the return of property seized during the investigation.
The case drew attention in Washington’s national security and strategic affairs circles because of Tellis’ long career advising the U.S. government on defense and Indo-Pacific policy.
Cases involving alleged mishandling of classified information have received increased scrutiny in recent years amid broader concerns over the retention of sensitive national security material by current and former government officials. (Source: IANS)
