The Court recognizes both the vital importance of a free press and the critical role that confidential sources play in the work of investigative journalists like Herridge. But applying the binding case law of this Circuit, the Court concludes that Chen’s need for the requested evidence overcomes Herridge’s qualified First Amendment privilege in this case.

Really now.

Regardless of how one feels about the press, its ability to work freely cannot be hindered by the government in any manner, including the allowance of legal action designed to silence media information sources. It bears mention that in a 2020 ruling in the matter, in the course of denying a Department of Justice request to dismiss the matter the court neither affirmed nor denied that the Privacy Act, under which Chen’ makes her claims, covers said claims.. //

While Herridge has made no public announcement regarding whether she will comply with the order instead of appealing the decision, one hopes she will not. This is important not only to her personally and professionally but to all genuine newsgathering efforts and national security itself. Without immunity from court-ordered harassment of such journalistic efforts, the Washington Post’s joke of the slogan “democracy dies in darkness” becomes chillingly real.