Disclaimer: I am not an attorney, and this information does not constitute legal advice. These insights were compiled with the assistance of AI for educational and informational purposes only. For specific legal guidance, always consult a qualified legal professional.
Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem recently reported that Elon Musk and his team, through their work with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), helped uncover that her official communications devices were being surreptitiously monitored, leading to the immediate termination and planned prosecution of the individuals responsible for the breach.
What are the criminal implications if a federal employee, acting alone or with others, surreptitiously records the President or their appointees and leaks that information in an attempt to unseat them from office?
A federal employee engaging in such conduct faces a “stack” of severe felony charges that span privacy violations, computer crimes, and national security breaches. The initial act of tapping a phone or bugging a workspace generally violates the Wiretap Act (18 U.S.C. § 2511) and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030), which carry penalties of five to ten years in prison per violation. Because presidential communications almost always involve national security, the act of leaking these recordings—regardless of the employee’s intent—would likely trigger the Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. § 793), where each shared document or recording can result in an additional 10-year sentence.
The effort to “unseat” a sitting president through extra-legal means elevates the situation from a simple leak to a crime against the state. If the effort involves a coordinated plan to use force or prevent the President from exercising their constitutional authority, the group could face Seditious Conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 2384), which carries a 20-year maximum sentence. Furthermore, a conviction for Insurrection or Rebellion (18 U.S.C. § 2383) or the unauthorized removal of government records (18 U.S.C. § 2071) carries a unique and devastating penalty: the individual is permanently disqualified from ever holding federal office again.
It is a common misconception that “whistleblower” status provides a shield for these actions. Under U.S. law, a protected disclosure must be made through specific, legal channels—such as an Inspector General or a Congressional Intelligence Committee. Bypassing these protocols to record and leak information to the public or the media is treated as a criminal act, not a protected disclosure. In the eyes of federal law, using the tools of the state to subvert the head of that state is a fundamental breach of the duty of loyalty to the Constitution. Upon entering service, every federal employee takes a solemn oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, affirming their primary loyalty to the rule of law rather than to any specific individual or political party.
Writing by Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal 