“All their memories of their father are in the visiting hall of Belmarsh prison and, as the case goes along, it becomes clearer and clearer to everyone that Julian is in prison for doing good journalism, for exposing corruption, for exposing the violations on innocent people in abusive wars for which there is impunity.”

US authorities want to put Assange on trial on 18 charges, nearly all under the Espionage Act, for publishing military documents on the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, which prosecutors say was reckless, damaged national security and endangered the lives of agents.

Assange’s many global supporters call the prosecution a travesty, an assault on journalism and free speech, and revenge for causing embarrassment. Calls for the case to be dropped have come from human rights groups, media bodies and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, along with other political leaders.

Biden said last month that he was considering a request from Australia to drop the case and let Assange return to his home country.

His lawyers hugged each other in court after the ruling while huge cheers erupted from outside court as the news reached them from inside the Royal Courts of Justice.

Loading

Assange’s barrister, Edward Fitzgerald, said prosecutors had failed to guarantee his client – who claims protections as a journalist for publishing classified information – could rely on press protections of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

“The real issue is whether an adequate assurance has been provided to remove the real risk identified by the court,” Fitzgerald said. “It is submitted that no adequate assurance has been made.”

American prosecutors allege that Assange encouraged and helped US Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to steal diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks published. Whistleblower Manning ’s 35-year prison sentence was commuted by then-president Barack Obama after she served almost seven.

James Lewis, representing the US government, said no one – neither US citizens nor foreign citizens – was entitled to rely on the First Amendment in relation to publication of illegally obtained national defence information giving the names of innocent sources.

Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What in the World newsletter.