Right to ask, not to know

OPINION:

In “Criminal or hero?: Secrecy vs. Jack Teixeira’s truth” (web, April 19), Judge Andrew Napolitano posits a “natural human right to search for and reveal the truth.”

This sounds perilously close to asserting the people have a right to know.

We do not. The judge is a libertarian, and as such he should know this. No right to know could ever coexist with free speech. We do have a right to ask, while certain people have an obligation to inform us. But these are by no means the same. 

For one thing, freedom of speech and freedom of the press extend to most omissions, mistakes and lies — in short, to misinformation. That trumps anyone’s right to know. For another thing, if a debtor defaults, we can sue. But we cannot garnish his paycheck (unless we’re the Internal Revenue Service). Those who owe us information and default on that “debt” can be upbraided for it. But we have no right to force them. Under oath they can plead the Fifth, and torture is out. 

The Bible makes the point with a parable. In the Garden of Eden, the serpent tells Eve: “Pay no attention to all this that you hear. You have a natural right to know whatever you please. I guarantee it. So go ahead. Take a bite, and share it with Adam.” 

As often as not, when “the people’s right to know” is asserted, it’s a claim of license to pry (i.e., to abridge someone’s right to privacy). Judge Napolitano should know this and rethink what he wrote.

JOHN S. MASON JR. 

Irvington, Virginia