A federal indictment unsealed in Washington on Monday charges former national security adviser John Bolton with unlawfully retaining and disclosing sensitive national defense information, according to court filings and a CBS News Special Report. The document, made public after being filed under seal, accuses Bolton of keeping classified material after leaving the White House and providing some of it to unauthorized persons — allegations that could carry severe criminal penalties if proven.

Prosecutors contend that Bolton, who served as President Donald J. Trump’s national security adviser from 2018 to 2019, “willfully retained” classified documents and “failed to safeguard” material related to matters of national defense, the indictment states. The Justice Department said it will move forward with the case; a spokesperson declined to comment further pending prosecutorial proceedings. Bolton, through an attorney, said he intended to contest the charges and asserted that any disclosures were in the public interest — a stance his legal team has pleaded in past disputes over classified material.

The indictment marks one of the most consequential legal confrontations in years between the U.S. government and a former senior official with deep ties to national security policymaking. Bolton, a long-standing advocate of robust American military posture and hawkish diplomacy toward Iran and North Korea, has been both a prominent voice in Republican foreign policy circles and a polarizing figure abroad. His indictment quickly reverberated among allies and adversaries alike, stoking questions about how the United States handles classified information and the risks that criminal prosecutions pose to intelligence cooperation.

“Ally capitals are watching closely,” said a former senior U.S. intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity. “There’s concern that high-profile prosecutions could chill the candor with which partners share sensitive assessments. Trust is as important as procedure in intelligence work.”

Internationally, the case offers fodder for adversaries seeking to exploit perceptions of U.S. disarray. Beijing and Moscow have historically pointed to American legal and political turmoil as evidence of strategic weakness; diplomats in Europe and Asia privately voiced alarm that the prosecution could complicate ongoing intelligence exchanges, particularly on Iran’s nuclear activities and China’s military modernization.

Legal scholars say the Bolton indictment also tests the boundary between legitimate public debate about foreign policy and the statutory protections accorded to classified information. “The normative question — who decides what belongs in the public domain when it concerns national security — is now a matter for the criminal courts,” said Anne-Marie Clarendon, a professor of international law. “How courts balance free speech, oversight and national security will have consequences far beyond this one case.”

Domestically, the prosecution is certain to deepen partisan debate ahead of a tense presidential campaign cycle. Supporters of Mr. Bolton argue that his disclosures, in some instances, were aimed at informing public debate about foreign policy; critics say accountability for handling classified material should be blind to ideology.

An arraignment date has not been scheduled. As the legal process unfolds, the case will be watched not only for its outcome but for its wider message to diplomats, spies and policymakers about how the United States prosecutes the intersection of secrecy, policy disagreement and the public’s right to know.