John Napier Tye (born c. 1976) is a former official of the U.S. State Department who came forward in 2014 as a whistleblower seeking to publicize certain electronic surveillance practices of the U.S. government under Executive Order 12333.

[2][8] Tye attended these briefings so that he could help prepare the State Department's response to the high-profile leaks disclosed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.

[12] In March 2013, Snowden had specifically asked his former colleagues at NSA whether EO 12333 could override existing statutes, a fact confirmed by his lawyer Jesselyn Radack.

[14] Radack's other clients, Thomas Drake and William Binney had also raised concerns about EO 12333 through internal channels prior to 2010.

Tye also met with staffers of the House and Senate Intelligence committees, and communicated his complaint to the inspector general of the NSA.

"[2] On July 18, 2014, The Washington Post published an editorial written by Tye highlighting his concerns over U.S. signals intelligence activities performed under E.O.

[9] Tye argued that under the government's interpretation of Order 12333, "incidental collection" could include the data of every person using popular internet services—including Gmail, Yahoo, and Dropbox—amounting to, in theory, "billions of people".

[2][9][12] In addition, Tye has insisted on having a third party present when speaking to reporters to counter any later claim that he revealed classified information.

[17] Joel emphasized that Americans cannot be directly targeted under Executive Order 12333, and that use and retention of the collected data is limited by policies approved by the U.S. Attorney General.

12333, with Indiana University law professor Fred Cate arguing that such a disclosure within the rules of the government's classification system may not have the impact of a leak of classified documents.

Mark Jaycox of the Electronic Frontier Foundation argued that Tye's disclosure would help to push forward the reform process.

Instead, would-be whistleblowers with classified information will be directed to investigators with security clearances to help expose wrongdoing without breaking the law or incurring criminal liability.

[20][21] "We are trying to hold the U.S. government accountable," Zaid explained, "and provide free legal services to whistleblowers so they don't ruin their careers in the process or be prosecuted.