We don't know if the NYT could "constitutionally publish without penalty" because the case it won was on a restraining order from the government. The court inhibited the prior restraint, and said that the government could prosecute AFTER publication. NYT published, the government declined to prosecute for political reasons.
The success of a criminal case will depend on the evidence - how legitimate is the "classification" of was what was published?
The chances of getting a conviction turn almost entirely on the contents of what was published. Assange admits publishing the material, so not much difficulty proving he published.
Pick some espionage case, like Aldrich Ames or Robert Hanssen. If they had published instead of a clandestine pass, a prosecution for publication would likely be successful.
One other thought, again this turns on the "quality" of the material being sought. Based on the allegation, there was a conspiracy to get some protected information. That the conspirators were inept does not save their bacon.