Marissa Mayer’s ‘Treason’
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.
The confession by the new chief executive of Yahoo, Marissa Mayer, that she feared being jailed as a “traitor” for failing to bow to government snooping on user data is a teachable moment in the debate over national security. Ms. Mayer told a conference on the Coast that Yahoo did, as it was put in the New York Post, “all it could to scrutinize or fight government requests for Yahoo user data but had to do as directed or face imprisonment.” It quoted Ms. Mayer as saying, “If you don’t comply, it is treason. We can’t talk about it because it is classified. Releasing classified information is treason, and you are incarcerated.”
It is incredible that a person as brilliant and admirable as Ms. Mayer so evidently is would make such a blunder. The fact is that releasing classified information, as serious a wrong as it is, is not treason. To be guilty of treason against the United States, one must do one of two things. One must either levy war against the United States. Or one must adhere to an enemy. Levy or adhere. Under the Constitution, merely adhering isn’t enough for treason. One must also give aid and comfort to the enemy to which one adheres. That’s it. There is nothing else under the Constitution that adds up to treason.
Is it too much to ask that a person in Ms. Mayer’s position, who wants to lead in this debate, comprehends American bedrock, which is laid down in section three of Article Three of the Constitution. We don’t gainsay the wisdom of Ms. Mayer’s decision that “In terms of protecting our users, it makes more sense to work within the system.” She is well within her rights to fight, as are Microsoft, Facebook and Google, to be permitted to disclose what cooperation they are giving the government.
Yahoo is among the companies currently in court seeking permission to be more transparent in how they are sharing data with the government. The company, in a filing made September 9, complains that it “has been unable to engage fully in the debate about whether the government has properly used its powers, because the government has placed a prior restraint on Yahoo!’s speech.” We don’t mind saying we hope that Yahoo gets the liberty it seeks — and that it learns the difference between treason and the lesser crimes.
