No. of Recommendations: 8
Isn't "violate a criminal statute", and "Illegal" the same thing? If something doesn't violate a statute isn't it by definition legal?
confused,
No.
The key here is that there are tons of laws that aren't criminal laws. They're civil laws, not crimes. If you drive ten miles over the limit, or build your house too close to your property line, or open a small business without paying your local occupational license fee - all those things are illegal, but they aren't crimes in your jurisdiction. They're civil violations. Probably! That's not legal advice!
There's lots and lots of laws and rules and regulations and ordinances and whatnot that don't carry criminal penalties. Violating them is against the law, but you haven't committed a crime if you violate them.
How would this apply to Clinton? The IG's report generally describes the situation as people (other than Clinton) sending her classified information that should not have been located in an unauthorized location. But most of the criminal provisions governing classified information criminalize the act of moving the classified information around - duplicating it, taking it from where it's supposed to be, or giving it to someone who shouldn't have it. Passively receiving or keeping classified information, even in an unsecured location, doesn't appear to fall within those criminal statutes. Because the information has been removed from where it's suppose to be (note the passive voice there), the government can insist that it be returned - but because the person who has the information didn't commit the active crime of removing it in the first place, the fact that it's in the wrong place isn't necessarily a crime that the current custodian can be charged with.
