JONATHAN TURLEY: Supreme Court must take Herridge case and protect reporters' sources

With her oldest son for support, Herridge walks to her mailbox daily to mail an $800 check to avoid revealing confidential sources in a 2017 national security story. The fines, draining her children's college savings, were temporarily lifted but will be reimposed unless the Supreme Court takes her case.

National Security Concerns

Herridge's report focused on Yanping Chen, who led the University of Management and Technology (UMT) in Northern Virginia, which catered to U.S. service members. Investigators alleged Chen's past in the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) posed a national security risk, potentially gathering information on military personnel.

Despite the Department of Justice declining to prosecute Chen, the government terminated its contracts with UMT following Herridge's investigation, citing national security concerns.

Legal Battle

Chen, who denied being a PLA colonel, sued under the Privacy Act after Herridge published photos of her in PLA uniform and a whistleblower's claims that UMT collected military student information accessible from China. Chen subpoenaed Herridge for her sources.

Much of what Chen references in her filing was available in the public domain.

Escalating Pressure

Chen's counsel initially demanded $800 daily fines, which were later rescinded. However, Chen has since requested the penalty be increased to $5,000 daily. Herridge's legal team argues the Privacy Act complaint is anemic and dubious, as much of the information referenced was already public.

The Supreme Court now faces the decision of whether to review Herridge's case and potentially reverse the lower courts' rulings, which could set a significant precedent for reporter-source privilege in national security cases.