Below is my column in The Hill on an important case currently before the Supreme Court on the free press and the ability to protect confidential sources. The underlying facts may seem like something out of The Onion: an accused Chinese operative and PLA Colonel who was viewed as a national security risk is successfully using the Privacy Act to get a respected journalist to reveal her confidential sources. However, it is very serious and, unless the Court reviews the case, investigative journalism in the United States could suffer a debilitating blow with little more than a shrug from the courts.
Here is the column:
This month, journalist Catherine Herridge is in the fight of her life — and the stakes for the country could not be higher. The former Fox and CBS reporter has long been one of the most prominent investigative journalists in the U.S., particularly on national security stories. She is now on her last appeal to the Supreme Court, attempting to protect the most vital prerequisite of the free press: confidentiality of sources.
At issue is a 2017 story that aired on Fox News concerning a Virginia-based training firm patronized by Pentagon officials. Herridge exposed ties of the University of Management and Technology to the Chinese military. It was the kind of difficult, complex story that made Herridge such a respected figure in her profession. The subject of the story, University of Management and Technology founder Yanping Chen, sued, claiming that the exposure had led to her loss of employment.
Such lawsuits are usually brought against journalists by disgruntled subjects under defamation or other grounds that are quickly dismissed by courts. But Chen brought a novel claim against various officials under the Privacy Act. She alleges that they disclosed to Herridge protected information about an FBI investigation. Rather than sue Herridge directly, Chen subpoenaed her to disclose the names of her sources. Herridge sat for a deposition but refused to breach confidentiality.
This is not Herridge’s first rodeo in fighting for journalistic values. Years ago, CBS News forced her out and seized her files containing confidential source information. Despite considerable costs, Herridge eventually stared down the network and forced it to return the files.
Notably, much of the Fox News story about Chen was available in the public domain. For example, a whistleblower and FBI informant had said publicly that Chen had admitted to him that she had been a colonel in China’s People’s Liberation Army. He also alleged that she told him to lie about that fact when called to testify before a federal grand jury.
Because Herridge refuses to disclose her sources, we do not know how much she actually relied on non-public information. This puts her in an impossible position: She would have to reveal sources in order to show that Chen’s claims are meritless.
In making her Privacy Act claim, Chen cited the disclosure of many facts already available publicly, including contradictions of her denials on being part of the Chinese military. The only information that had not already appeared in the public domain appears to be photographic, including a picture of Chen in a Chinese colonel’s uniform.
In this case, Herridge had the misfortune of seeking relief in Washington, D.C., where judges have been relatively permissive in allowing such disputes to go to trial. In 2023, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, an Obama appointee, tossed aside protections that other circuit courts recognize under the First Amendment. He ordered Herridge to identify her confidential sources, then held her in contempt when she refused, imposing a crippling $800-a-day fine. Even that was not enough for Chen, who tried to have the penalties increased to $5,000 a day.
Before the fines were paused in August pending appeal, Herridge had to write a check every day from her two children’s college funds. “These fines are designed to break you emotionally and professionally,” she told me. “I would walk every day to the mailbox with our oldest son for emotional and moral support.”
Unfortunately, a panel of three judges on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Cooper’s ruling. Herridge therefore went to the Supreme Court for an emergency injunction against the daily fine. The court refused to intervene immediately, although Justice Brett Kavanaugh indicated that he wanted to grant the relief.
Herridge is now back before the Supreme Court, which will have a final opportunity to take the case and prevent a catastrophic blow to press freedoms. If the court again punts, then any aggrieved subject of a news story could effectively strip journalistic sources of confidentiality by alleging a Privacy Act violation.
The cause of this pileup is the highly permissive standard adopted by the D.C. Circuit for the single most important jurisdiction for investigative reporting. To compel disclosure, Chen needs only to show that the source is central to her case and that she has exhausted other avenues of discovery. This test exposes every reporter who breaks a story in Washington involving government abuse or waste. Imagine if Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein had been sued under the Privacy Act by Nixon administration officials and forced to disclose the identity of Deep Throat.
Other circuits have a balancing test that allows for a more contextual resolution of such disputes. Another approach would be to deny such compelled disclosures when the case (as here) would not likely survive a motion for summary judgment. Chen, who lost her position because of information already in the public domain, cannot possibly show meaningful injuries from these photographs.
The irony in the case is crushing. Chen is an alleged former colonel in the People’s Liberation Army, using the U.S. Privacy Act to gut a Constitutional right not recognized in China. Of course she still has rights in this country, but the question is not whether she can sue under the Privacy Act — it is what standard she must meet before the courts make a journalist betray confidential sources.
Herridge got the story right and did the right thing in protecting her sources at great personal cost. The justices now have a chance to protect her. They should take her case. Not only has it created a split among the circuit courts, but it also has a compelling record to reconsider the confusing 1972 decision in Branzburg v. Hayes, which one appellate judge ridiculed for being “about as clear as mud.”
Herridge is not seeking immunity or a favor. She is a tough reporter who just wants to do her job and protect her sources under a fair legal standard. The question is whether four justices will agree and grant review in Herridge v. Chen.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.” He previously worked for CBS News and currently works at Fox News as a legal analyst. His views do not necessarily reflect those of those networks.
This should be a slam dunk for the Supreme Court. Every Journalist should be backing Catherine Herridge loudly. Protecting sources is basic well understood journalistic values.
Herridge is one of the ONLY truth telling journalists that we have, so they have to punish her, so that she tows the Progressive agenda like the rest of them…..Activist Judges were picked for this exact reason……to rid America of anybody who doesn’t tow the line.
Did you hear what Mark Zuckerberg (who owns META) did to “Indivisible”, right at the height of planning for the “No Kings” rally this past weekend? He inactivated their account for several hours—without any rational explanation. Zuckerberg flew to Mar A Lago right afterwards.
Bear in mind that Zuckerberg has donated millions to Trump’s campaign and for that unwanted gilded ballroom.
Does anyone believe this was anything other than deliberate?
Trump is also trying to force Zelenskyy out as President of Ukraine because he won’t knuckle under to Putin, so he got Elon Musk to throttle back the Starshield satellite that Ukraine depends on to defend itself against Russia.
Trump wants Russia to prevail over Ukraine and to take over those parts of Ukraine that it wants, so he can claim he “settled” a war. He also agreed to purchase Russian diesel, under the theory that it will lower the historically high price, but it won’t even come close. Russia is helping Iran to attack us and Russia will use the money Trump will send it to attack Ukraine, which happens to be our ally. And Trump is ignoring the Russian sanctions passed by Congress.
Trump also said: “I examined his ass”, referring to a Republican candidate he was promoting, along with describing his jawline and shoulders. What would MAGA media say if Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg or Barack Obama— or even Scott Bessent had made such a comment about a man’s body? Is this appropriate presidential commentary? What does it tell you about this person and how seriously he takes about the office he holds?
Daily TDS crap from ANON
Yes, the Nony Mice are most annoying.
Heads up: here are some things Trump and his administration are planning to roll out AFTER the midterms:
All of these unpopular actions are delayed on purpose because Trump and MAGA know that most Americans oppose them.
Show up and vote them out!
So vote COMMIES in??? TDS ANON
“Plan to turn over 10 million people in default on their student loans to private debt collectors.”
I doubt it – but I would support that – if you borrow money you must pay it back – it was not a gift.
“Planning to release details of the US attack on that Iranian school in which over 150 people were killed— mostly children.”
Iran has been using schools and hospitals and mosques for IRGC training. This is well documented – there is lots of video. We still do not know who hit the school. Nor does it matter – the US did not deliberately target Children.
But Iran does deliberately train the IRGC in schools.
“Planning to end access to less expensive Canadian prescription drugs to punish Canada.”
EVERY President has talked about allowing US drug re-importaion – this BTW ios not the importation of Canadian Made drugs, it is the re-importation of US made drugs sent to canada and sold for low prices and then brought back to the US.
The idea behind legal drug reimportation is to restore the free market in drugs – prices elsewhere in the world would rise and in the US drop until they were about the same and the US would no longer be subsidizing the world.
The problem is that drug reimportation provides a HUGE oportunity for Drug forgeries and that is very very dangerous. Once a drug leaves the US – we lose track of it. When we allow it to be reimported we are counting on knowing it is a qaulity project because it LOOKS like it was made in the US under US drug laws.
“Cuts to Medicaid by making it more onerous for disabled people to stay qualified.”
I support getting unqualified – or non-0existant people off medicaid.
There is massive fraud in all govenrment programs – have you learned nothing from DOGE or the fraud in MN and CA – and no that is not the only place there is massive entitlements fraud.
If you give away money people will find a way to get it.
“Trump plans to attack Iran but not until after the midterms.”
You think that is some secret ?
The Iranian govenrment can make a deal or be destroyed. Their best chance to actually negotiate is NOW.
Honestly I doubt we are attacking on a grand scale after midterms – because I doubt we need to.
Iran runs out of money TOTALLY in December. They are already fighting Kurds in the north other groups in the south and their own people through the country.
Soon enough they will be too weak to fight off the various insurgent groups.
“Tens of millions of Americans will lose their health insurance coverage by cutting Obamacare subsidies.”
Tens of millions of non-existant people.
Regardless PPACA is just another failed disaster.
Trump can not cut off REAL PEOPLE who qualify from PPACA.
They have already gotten rid of nearly 1M fake PPACA recipients – they have done so with an error rate so low that they only cut off about a dozen real people by accident out of nearly a million accounts they closed.
“All of these unpopular actions are delayed on purpose because Trump and MAGA know that most Americans oppose them.”
Absolutely presidents try to make things look good for midterms – Do you not remeber Obama’s open Mike slip to Medvedc ?
But much of what you are ranting about is nonsense.
Alot of it is alreayd happening.
Show up and vote them out!
When Le Monde complains about left wing violence, you know they are panicking…
Climate crisis, conflict-driven vision, form of political violence emerged, directed against symbols of the French Republic and representatives of state authority, people wearing hoods and masks and throwing fireworks, paving stones and other objects at officers in the Place de la République….
Hmmmm, where have we seen this before? Merci buckets, France for the best October surprise possible for America’s upcoming election. Vote Republican straight ticket or enable Marxist driven violence.
…..
Violence in France is a consequence of the last decade’s political reconfiguration
The violence on the fringes of protests across France on Saturday is the result of the evolution of the political system during Emmanuel Macron’s presidency, marked by the rise of radical parties that promote a conflict-driven vision of society and a confrontational approach.
But in an anxious climate marked by the climate crisis, surging fuel prices and international conflicts, mounting discontent sent hundreds of thousands of anxious and angry French people into the streets.
Alongside the intolerable looting that ravaged many businesses, a form of political violence emerged, directed against symbols of the French Republic and representatives of state authority. City halls and prefectures were targeted and, in some cases, set on fire. On Saturday night, law enforcement clashed with rioters less than 300 meters from the Elysée Palace.
Once confined to sterile opposition roles with no real prospects, the far-right Rassemblement National (RN) and radical-left La France Insoumise (LFI) now dominate public debate.
They offer two opposing worldviews. The far right defends an identity-based vision of society and openly stigmatizes immigrants or people from immigrant backgrounds. The radical left has, since 2024, challenged the government’s legitimacy and the established order, and openly embraces the idea of “making everything a conflict,” putting confrontation at the heart of its approach.
https://archive.ph/rZKpj
There is no far right in france – there are just two different forms of socialism competing.
The supposed Right in France has policies that predate Trump that are similar to some of Trump’s policies – but they are still socialist at their core.
I’m unqualified but is Harridge admitting there was a government leaker? The photo came in the mail. Couldn’t Harridge have spoken to the DOJ or an officer in the executive branch about her concerns? Could she have contacted Grassley or Comer for investigation bringing to the public? What’s the chain of command?
Whistle-blower is about money only?
Soooo, is there a representation by Chen that the published photos are fake?
Is Chen a former, or current, PLA officer?
If so, that is a secret I don’t think she should be entitled to keep.
I know Chen’s attorney must be working overtime to ensure that the PLA officer question remains outside the scope of the matter being litigated.
But the Supremes can change the scope. And should.
I’m so sorry for Herridge’s persecution here.
But I’m glad that Chen is no longer running a school for U.S. military, with tuition reimbursement from a U.S. military adjacent source.
If the photo showing her in PLA uniform is legit, that the school was allowed to run and be supported thanks to the U.S. military is simply ridiculous.
If Chen was in fact an officer with the People’s Liberation Army at one time, I don’t even understand how/why she is in this country. Is she a citizen?
Release of the source’s name would be chilling for future sources willing to come forward (or go around) rules that are ultimately harmful to national security. (Yes, yes, I know “national security” has been abused.) There is absolutely no reason to assume the D.C. court would not purposely rule in a way deleterious future leakers to discourage such actions that expose probably Chinese (CCP) operatives in sensitive positions. If there is a circuit split, that is a good reason for SCOTUS to take the case. It will be interesting, at least, to see how they rule. (Interpretation: how many of our imminent black robed gods consider the Constitution to be a suicide pact?)
New Poll Negative On Trump
Most Americans think Donald Trump is using the presidency to enrich himself, according to a new poll, as the US president’s approval rating falls to a new low ahead of November’s midterm elections.
A new Washington Post-ABC poll put Trump’s approval rating at 33% as he continues to crisscross the country as part of his campaign blitz for embattled Republicans.
Most Americans (66%) believe Trump is using the presidency to enrich himself, according to the survey – including 34% of Republicans. This is a 12-point jump from last September.
theguardian.com/us-news/2026/oct/19/trump-presidency-rich-poll
……………………………….
As Republicans across the country brace for a potentially tough set of results next month, 61% of Americans said Trump was not committed to free and fair elections.
How many Anti Trump posts do you make per day Anon?? 5-10…20??
Maybe stick to the days article for once???
Rassmussen has Trump at 43 – he has been between 41 and 47 since Jan 2026.
There is no negative Trend – this is just more left wing B$
Yes sue bernstien and Woodward about DeepThroat. I don’t believe the person who family self identified as DeepThroat was DeepThroat, they only did it to get money and used his Alzheimer’s condition. I believe it was the same person who erased the tapes to cover his tracks.
What Mr. Turley is leaving out is the problem with journalists spreading illegal leaks. When a leak is obviously illegal, no journalist should have a right to secrecy regarding the source. Privacy is not an absolute right, and journalism isn’t a shield from due process.
Hmmm. I thought SCOTUS settled that with the pentagon papers. Leaker guilty of a crime, publisher in the clear.
Correct
SCOTUS should grant review, examine the constitutional and First Amendment issues, and determine whether compelling Herridge to identify confidential sources is legally justified.
SCOTUS should reject compelled disclosure if the demand cannot be justified under a constitutionally sound standard that adequately protects press freedom.
If the demand rests on an insufficient showing of necessity and threatens confidential newsgathering without adequate constitutional justification, Herridge should prevail and the disclosure order should be vacated.
As much as Turley tries – there is not a constitutional issue here.
There is no journalists right to protect their sources.
But this case does present problems. Turley assers – likely correctly that this case is a loser – so bad it will get dismissed at summary judgement.
This is not government or law enforcement seeking the source of an illegal leak.
This is a private party seeking to know who ratted them out to a journalist and using discovery is a obvious loser case to do so.
The case is an obvious abuse of process, and the judge should have dismissed it or limited discovery.
But I do not think there is an issue for SCOTUS
This is likely a loser in front of SCOTUS even though the system is being gamed.
There is no journalist constitutional right to refuse to disclose sources
But there is also not a case good enough to allow discovery.
Barack Obama’s administration:
In 2016, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia decided not to file charges against Chen.
Barack Obama’s administration:
In 2017, Fox News aired a report alleging that Chen had concealed her prior work for the Chinese military. The network later published an FBI form memorializing an interview with Chen’s daughter, personal photographs seized from Chen’s home during the FBI search, and information from Chen’s immigration and naturalization papers. The reports stated that the FBI searches had occurred as part of a counter-intelligence operation. They also cited anonymous sources describing a conflict between the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office over whether to file charges against Chen….
Donald Trump’s administration:
In 2018, DoD terminated UMT’s participation in the Tuition Assistance Program. That decision, along with a broader hit to UMT’s reputation, caused its enrollment and revenue to fall sharply. These losses impacted Chen’s income and the value of her personal investment in UMT.
https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2025/09/24-5050-2137763.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
Argued November 18, 2024
Decided September 30, 2025
No. 24-5050
YANPING CHEN,
APPELLEE
v.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, ET AL.,
APPELLEES
CATHERINE HERRIDGE,
APPELLANT
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
(No. 1:18-cv-03074)
Very interesting and compelling story. It is not clear from the Prof. Turley’s account, why Yanping Chen was not asked to authenticate the photos in question, identify the photographer of those photos, and declare why it is necessary to pursue an investigation of subsequent copies and ownership of those photos since her school business apparently has collapsed.
It is a myth that journalists are somehow protected under the First Amendment, which actually is to protect ALL CITIZENS from prosecution for things they might publish. The media has made it their private ordinance. Those who reveal private information are breaking the law and journalists should not be protected from revealing their sources. Any article with unsourced information is so much bs if the writer refuses to name the source.