Through the recent public and political uproar caused by the WikiLeaks, Nick Barvin investigates the prosecution of WikiLeaker, Julian Assange; in his article See You in Court, Mr. Assange. In this article, Barvin discusses the restrictions and possibilities of prosecuting Julian Assange for his release of papers from America’s National Security and Defense department. The restriction in trialing Assange in court is the first amendment. The first amendment states that every individual has the right to speak freely. Therefore, the United States may not be able to get Assange to the court room; although, it is proven that this man has threatened the national security of the United States.

Barvin uses historical court cases to try to predict the possible prosecution of Julian Assange. Specifically, Nick Barvin regularly regards to the Pentagon-case during the Vietnam War and the Bartniki case in 2001. In both of these cases, the first amendment held true. For the Pentagon-case, the New York Times and the Washington Post were permitted to publish information they had I intercepted from the government in regards to their tactics in the Vietnam War. As for the Bartniki case, he was originally found guilty for illegally intercepting a confidential conversation between Pennsylvania union workers. But when appealed to the Supreme Court, the case was overturned due to the inalienable rights of the first amendment. Through these two instances of historical evidence, Nick Barvin feels that the Supreme Court may never be able to get Julian Assange into the courtroom. But if they do, the same will hold for the past:”the first amendment shall prevail”

After reading Seen You in Court, Mr. Assange, I have a stronger opinion about this topic than Nick Barvin. In this article, the motive of Barvin was to inform his readers. Therefore, he never takes a distinct stance on whether Assange should be prosecuted and convicted for his actions. As for me, Julian Assange will not be prosecuted in the court of law, because he has not committed an unlawful act. The primary reason I feel this way is so that this whole situation ends up demeaning our already dysfunctional government. Specifically, it will portray Barak Obama as the absent-minded and atrocious leader he truly is. Basically, I hope that Julian Assange is tried and found innocent, because it will continue the downturn in public approval for Obama. Ultimately, I will lead to his defeat in the 2012 presidential elections. Aside from my thoughts on President Obama, I still feel that our country can never abandon the Bill of Rights, because it represents the foundation of the United States. Consequently, I can only pray that our Supreme Court stays true to the first amendment. Otherwise, this event may represent extermination of the autonomous America that we are privileged to have.