Hillary Clinton’s defense against growing evidence she may have broken the law requiring her to keep national security information secret amounts to what a teenager might say after getting a parking ticket. It just isn’t fair, Clinton says.

After the most recent release of evidence Clinton used her private email server to handle top-secret information, her presidential campaign spokesman had this reaction: “This appears to be over-classification run amok.” In other words, the State Department and intelligence agencies labeled too much information top secret when that was not necessary. Again, that is something like a teen driver insisting he parked illegally in a space for handicapped drivers because the designation was not really needed.

But “over-classification” is not Clinton’s problem.

Whatever the rationale for labeling information secret, it was designated as such – and she knew that.

As secretary of state, she appears to have knowingly broken the law regarding how top-secret information is safeguarded. That’s a serious matter.

Ignorance of the law is no defense, it has been said. Even more so, as any judge would – and may, in the near future – remind Clinton, disagreement with the law is no defense, either.