Further Amendment to Executive Order 12958, as Amended, Classified National Security Information

Background

Before its revocation, Executive Order 13292 significantly impacted the classification and declassification of national security information in the United States. It amended EO 12958 and extended the scope of classified information to include defense against transnational terrorism, reflecting the evolving nature of perceived security threats post-9/11. This expansion prioritized the protection of sensitive information linked to anti-terrorism efforts, thereby increasing the volume of classified documents and, consequently, the complexity of declassification processes. The order elevated government caution by presuming potential harm from the unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information.

This order also influenced administrative approaches across federal agencies by adjusting the rules regarding original classification authority. It allowed certain senior officials, including those previously without such authority, to classify information as Top Secret, Secret, or Confidential. This democratization of authority implied a broader distribution of power to classify, thereby increasing the responsibility on officials in various departments. This change required comprehensive education and training programs to ensure that those granted this authority could effectively navigate the intricacies of national security information management.

The changes necessitated by this directive also included procedural adaptations in handling classified information. Agencies had to establish systematic reviews while developing and utilizing classification guides. The directive set forth clear prohibitions against classification aimed at concealing inefficiencies, illegal activities, or administrative errors, ensuring transparency except where legitimate national security concerns were present. This order underscored stringent penalties for violations, thus promoting a culture of accountability within the bureaucratic landscape of national security.

Reason for Revocation

President Barack Obama's decision to revoke Executive Order 13292 was framed within a broader ideological shift towards greater transparency and government openness. This decision aligned with Obama's campaign promise to increase governmental accountability and public access to information. The revocation was part of a larger ideological stance emphasizing the importance of balancing national security concerns with the public's right to know, affirming democratic principles and addressing concerns about excessive government secrecy.

The move to revoke the order was indicative of a shift away from the post-9/11 era's stringent national security measures, which critics argued had led to overclassification and reduced governmental transparency. The Obama administration sought to address these concerns by revamping the classification system to improve the efficiency and accessibility of declassification processes. This approach aimed to eliminate undue secrecy and restore the public's trust in government operations, reflecting a departure from the previous administration's more restrictive information policies.

Furthermore, the revocation addressed the procedural criticisms that had surfaced regarding the decision-making processes for classification. Under Executive Order 13292, the broader distribution of classification authority had introduced challenges related to consistency and oversight. By redefining and tightening classification standards, the Obama administration aimed to curb unnecessary bureaucratic complications and align classification authority more closely with genuine national security needs.

Obama's revocation of the order served as a signal to both domestic and international audiences of a renewed commitment to open governance. By dismantling some of the secrecy frameworks positioned during the Bush era, the administration sought to strike a more judicious balance between security concerns and public transparency, a nuanced approach that took into account both the lessons learned and the challenges inherited from previous policies.

Winners

The revocation of this executive order likely benefited civil liberties organizations advocating for government transparency, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. These organizations have long been proponents of greater access to government information, arguing that it is crucial for maintaining democratic accountability. The shift towards more transparency in classified information procedures aligned with their mission to challenge overclassification and advocate for the public's right to access governmental records.

Journalists and researchers also stood to gain from the revocation, as it potentially facilitated improved access to government-held information. This development was especially beneficial for investigative journalists aiming to uncover stories of public interest that rely on previously classified documents. The ease of access introduced by revised declassification processes meant that historical records relating to national security, which might have been previously inaccessible due to cumbersome bureaucratic processes, were more readily available, enriching public discourse and historical understanding.

Academia, particularly historians and political scientists, also benefitted from the policy change. The revocation allowed for enhanced access to records of historical significance, thereby enabling more comprehensive research on U.S. political and defense history. By facilitating a more efficient declassification process, scholars could revisit past events with fresh insights supported by previously unavailable documentation, ultimately contributing to a richer and more nuanced academic discourse.

Losers

Conversely, certain segments of the defense and intelligence communities perceived the revocation as a potential risk to national security. These groups often argue that increased transparency could inadvertently expose sensitive operations or methodologies, especially as they relate to counterterrorism and espionage. The development of declassification processes may have been viewed as an increment of risk for intelligence strategies that depend on confidential operations remaining undetected.

Contractors working within the national security apparatus, particularly those engaged in classified projects, may have faced increased scrutiny and the pressure of maintaining compliance with revised declassification measures. Companies involved in defense-related contracting, such as Lockheed Martin or Raytheon, had to navigate heightened mechanisms for transparency without compromising their proprietary or project-specific sensitive information, which could impact their operational autonomy.

Government officials who were comfortable with the broader classification authority under Executive Order 13292 may have found the shift towards centralized and more stringent classification protocols to reduce their autonomy. These changes reversed the democratization of classification powers, leading to adjustments in their operational procedures and potentially altering the flow of information within agencies, requiring adaptation to new oversight mechanisms that prioritize judicious use of classification.