Why Joe Biden Wants To Extradite Julian Assange to The US? Fiancee Accuses UK Authorities of Playing "Executioner"

Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, is facing new challenges after the UK's High Court decided last Friday that he might be extradited to the United States.

You'd think that, for something so big and serious, you'd be able to obtain a clear response to a basic question: why does Joe Biden want Julian Assange extradited?

When Biden was elected president in January 2021, followers of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange hoped that the incoming government would scrap the whole thing.

The extradition procedure, as well as the 18 accusations he faced - 17 of which were under the Espionage Act - were launched by Donald Trump, who had previously expressed support for the whistleblower organization; but then, he changed his mind.

Julian Assange extradition

Indeed, Assange's supporters anticipated that once a British judge, Vanessa Baraitser, determined that while US prosecutors had satisfied the criteria for extradition, there was too large a risk of his killing himself, the case would be closed.

A High Court judgment allowing Julian Assange to be extradited to the United States has been described as a "travesty of justice" and a "hammer blow to free expression" by human rights and press freedom organizations, The Independent reported.

Extradition of Assange "to confront charges for creating a source and supporting the discovery of wrongdoing would be a hammer blow to free expression," according to Michelle Stanistreet, general secretary of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ).

A British newspaper said on Friday that a UK Assange can be extradited to the United States to face espionage charges coming from his publishing of State Department and Defense Department papers given by Chelsea Manning, a former Army intelligence analyst, in 2010.

Per MSNBC, the accusations against Assange center on whether an organization that operates exclusively to acquire and publish unlawfully stolen government secrets qualifies as a media outlet entitled to First Amendment protections. They are not based on WikiLeaks' publication of Democratic Party emails hacked by the Russian government in support of Trump during the 2016 presidential election.

The accusations against Assange center on whether an organization that operates exclusively to acquire and publish unlawfully stolen government secrets qualifies as a media outlet entitled to First Amendment protections. They are not based on WikiLeaks' publication of Democratic Party emails hacked by the Russian government in support of Trump during the 2016 presidential election.

UK prepares to send Julian Assange to the US

Meanwhile, Julian Assange's fiancee has accused the UK government of acting as a "executioner" after the WikiLeaks founder suffered a stroke in Belmarsh jail. After a stroke in October, Stella Moris, 38, claimed the 50-year-old was left with a drooping right eyelid, memory issues, and indicators of neurological impairment.

Campaigners think the incident was precipitated by the ongoing High Court struggle over whether he should be extradited to the United States. Moris, his two-year-old daughter, has been warning that her partner's health is deteriorating.

The US government has filed a High Court challenge to District Judge Vanessa Baraitser's January decision that Assange should not be extradited to the US, citing a genuine and "oppressive danger of suicide."

On Friday, Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett, sitting with Lord Justice Holroyde, decided in favor of the United States after a two-day hearing in October. The top justices concluded that the judge made her judgment mainly on the possibility of Assange being confined in solitary confinement if extradited.

However, US officials later stated that Assange would not be subjected to the most severe sanctions, either before or after his conviction, should he commit an act that warranted them in the future. Moris said on Friday that her partner's attorneys want to take his case to the UK's Supreme Court.

Per Daily Mail, before any appeal is heard, the justices must first determine whether or not to consider the case. The Ministry of Justice declined to comment on specific instances, according to a spokesperson.