When the government's legitimate right to protect classified information clashes with the public's legitimate right to know what its government is doing, the lines are drawn for lawyers to rush into battle.

A panel sponsored by the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Law and National Security explored those lines in a webcast Tuesday. “Whistleblowers, Leaks and the Media: The Legal Rules” included lawyers and journalists who have been caught up in national security issues.

Mark Zaid, managing and name partner at his own law office in Washington, D.C., has represented clients ranging from members of Congress, to journalists, to covert CIA operations officers. He is also executive director of the James Madison Project, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit group dedicated to reducing secrecy in government and promoting government accountability.

The question is not whether you agree with a certain whistleblower, Zaid said, “but what is his status as a matter of law?” He said his job is helping a client to lawfully bring information to the attention of government.

The line blurs when national security is involved, he said. “You cannot lawfully disclose classified information, so how do you best represent folks?” In some cases, he said, a client cannot even legally tell you where he works.

Zaid said he does it through “guerrilla warfare—running from one tree and firing, then to the next tree.”

He explained he uses a variety of tools in all branches of government, including the client's supervisor, intelligence committees on Capitol Hill, inspector generals and the courts, sometimes all at the same time.

“If you have someone with a security clearance, then file a Freedom of Information Act request and start to litigate in federal court,” he said. “Or, have your client write an article, and submit it for agency review before publication. It puts the government in an awkward situation.”

In one case, Zaid said, a client managed to publish the information he wanted to reveal in an agency-approved article in The Washington Post.

But one thing Zaid advises no lawyer to do is to help a client leak classified information to a reporter: Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning both leaked classified information to the press.

“If I help a client leak to a reporter, then I have crossed an ethical line by facilitating a crime,” he said. He advised anyone thinking of leaking classified data to consult an experienced lawyer first.

Other panelists included Paul Rosenzweig, founder of Red Branch Consulting, senior adviser to the Chertoff Group and law lecturer at George Washington University. A former deputy assistant secretary for policy in the Department of Homeland Security, Rosenzweig spoke about government prosecution of whistleblowers.

“The government prosecution of leaks is not a policy rejection of the idea of a free press or transparency,” he said. “When these prosecutions are brought, someone has determined that the value of discourse on the issue does not measure up to the harm that is done by the disclosure.”

He also warned that a journalist who discloses leaked information, or takes part in soliciting classified information, could be prosecuted as well.

Two journalists rounded out the panel. They were Ellen Shearer, bureau chief of Medill News Service and the Medill Washington Program for the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University; and Shane Harris, senior writer at The Wall Street Journal who covers national security and intelligence issues.

They discussed the importance of a free press to society and to good government. But they also said there is a need not to cross the line into soliciting classified data or aiding and abetting an illegal leak.

They also said there is an ethical duty to make sure a potential source is aware there could be consequences if he or she chooses to leak information, including legal ones.

When the government's legitimate right to protect classified information clashes with the public's legitimate right to know what its government is doing, the lines are drawn for lawyers to rush into battle.

A panel sponsored by the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Law and National Security explored those lines in a webcast Tuesday. “Whistleblowers, Leaks and the Media: The Legal Rules” included lawyers and journalists who have been caught up in national security issues.

Mark Zaid, managing and name partner at his own law office in Washington, D.C., has represented clients ranging from members of Congress, to journalists, to covert CIA operations officers. He is also executive director of the James Madison Project, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit group dedicated to reducing secrecy in government and promoting government accountability.

The question is not whether you agree with a certain whistleblower, Zaid said, “but what is his status as a matter of law?” He said his job is helping a client to lawfully bring information to the attention of government.

The line blurs when national security is involved, he said. “You cannot lawfully disclose classified information, so how do you best represent folks?” In some cases, he said, a client cannot even legally tell you where he works.

Zaid said he does it through “guerrilla warfare—running from one tree and firing, then to the next tree.”

He explained he uses a variety of tools in all branches of government, including the client's supervisor, intelligence committees on Capitol Hill, inspector generals and the courts, sometimes all at the same time.

“If you have someone with a security clearance, then file a Freedom of Information Act request and start to litigate in federal court,” he said. “Or, have your client write an article, and submit it for agency review before publication. It puts the government in an awkward situation.”

In one case, Zaid said, a client managed to publish the information he wanted to reveal in an agency-approved article in The Washington Post.

But one thing Zaid advises no lawyer to do is to help a client leak classified information to a reporter: Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning both leaked classified information to the press.

“If I help a client leak to a reporter, then I have crossed an ethical line by facilitating a crime,” he said. He advised anyone thinking of leaking classified data to consult an experienced lawyer first.

Other panelists included Paul Rosenzweig, founder of Red Branch Consulting, senior adviser to the Chertoff Group and law lecturer at George Washington University. A former deputy assistant secretary for policy in the Department of Homeland Security, Rosenzweig spoke about government prosecution of whistleblowers.

“The government prosecution of leaks is not a policy rejection of the idea of a free press or transparency,” he said. “When these prosecutions are brought, someone has determined that the value of discourse on the issue does not measure up to the harm that is done by the disclosure.”

He also warned that a journalist who discloses leaked information, or takes part in soliciting classified information, could be prosecuted as well.

Two journalists rounded out the panel. They were Ellen Shearer, bureau chief of Medill News Service and the Medill Washington Program for the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University; and Shane Harris, senior writer at The Wall Street Journal who covers national security and intelligence issues.

They discussed the importance of a free press to society and to good government. But they also said there is a need not to cross the line into soliciting classified data or aiding and abetting an illegal leak.

They also said there is an ethical duty to make sure a potential source is aware there could be consequences if he or she chooses to leak information, including legal ones.