Disclosure of fired general's polygraph may have violated privacy laws

By

October 30, 2026 / 12:49 PM EDT / CBS News

Add CBS News on Google

Washington — Following the news that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired another Army general this week, a statement shared to media outlets from a Pentagon official said the high-ranking officer had failed polygraph examinations amid an ongoing investigation into alleged leaks of classified information to journalists. The revelation is unusual and raises questions about whether the disclosure violated federal privacy laws. 

Lt. Gen. Brett Sylvia's ouster from the Joint Staff was first reported by The Atlantic Wednesday evening.

Soon after, social media influencers and news outlets, including CBS News, published a statement that said Sylvia failed three polygraph examinations. Some attorneys say the disclosure could run afoul of the Privacy Act of 1974, which generally prohibits federal agencies from releasing personal information maintained in certain government records without the individual's consent or other legal authorization. 

Polygraph results, which are ordinarily maintained in personnel security or counterintelligence records, are protected under the law. 

The statement from the official also accused Sylvia of leaking classified information about Iran and the Russia-Ukraine war. 

Brad Moss, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney who specializes in national security and security clearance law, told CBS News that the Privacy Act prohibits public disclosure of these types of details from an official's file without consent of the official. Courts have recognized that verbal disclosures can also violate the law, and individuals can sue federal agencies for certain violations of the Privacy Act. 

"It defies belief to see … [the] leaking of Privacy Act-protected information of an employee in order to accuse that same employee of themselves being accused of unauthorized leaks," said Moss.

Sylvia, a highly decorated three-star general with a Purple Heart and six Bronze Star Medals — one of them for valor — served as the director of strategy, plans and policy for the Joint Staff, known as the J5. He was removed from his position over what the official described as "severe misconduct." 

No reply was returned when CBS News reached out to Sylvia on Thursday. The Pentagon also did not respond when asked about the details shared by the official and the Privacy Act. 

The official alleged that Sylvia had repeatedly disclosed classified information to journalists and began meeting with reporters outside the Pentagon after the department instituted a policy requiring journalists to be escorted inside the building, adding that the investigation remained ongoing and had been referred to the Justice Department. CBS News has reached out to the agency for comment.

The allegations from the official could not be independently verified by CBS News, and the official provided no evidence supporting the claims. Two other Pentagon sources confirmed to CBS News that the firing was related to the polygraph tests, but disputed the claims of the general leaking classified information.

Citing unnamed officials, The New York Times reported that Sylvia spoke to at least one journalist while on the Joint Staff but denied sharing any sensitive or classified information. On Thursday evening, Axios reported that Sylvia admitted to leaking classified information about Ukraine and Iran to two reporters from separate news outlets over a one year period, according to an internal report of the investigation obtained by the news agency. CBS News has not seen or been able to verify the contents of the internal report. 

But separate from the allegations of leaking classified information is the statement that followed the breaking news on Wednesday. 

Under the Privacy Act, federal agencies are generally prohibited from disclosing certain protected information maintained in the U.S. government's system of records without the individual's written consent, unless a statutory exception applies. 

"This is a Privacy Act violation," Cody Harnish, a former Army officer with the Judge Advocate General's Corps who now works as a private defense attorney for U.S. service members, told CBS News. 

"Polygraph results are protected records under the Privacy Act of 1974. They are exactly the kind of records the Pentagon withholds from requests under the Freedom of Information Act because they are protected," said Harnish. "Secretary Hegseth cannot sign off on the Pentagon not following the statute."

He added: "The statement discloses a lot more than polygraph results. It also discloses the existence of a pending counterintelligence investigation, a referral to the Department of Justice … and the Pentagon's conclusory statement of 'severe misconduct' in a case that it admits is still being investigated. … Additionally, if they wanted to go after the general with a court-martial, the statement is clear proof of Unlawful Command Influence."

Unlawful Command Influence, or UCI, occurs when military commanders or senior officials improperly interfere with the military justice process, potentially undermining the fairness of an investigation or court-martial. Military courts have often described it as the "mortal enemy of military justice," and UCI can be actual or apparent, meaning that even the perception that senior leaders are attempting to influence investigators, prosecutors, witnesses or military judges can raise concerns about the integrity and impartiality of proceedings. Presidents and defense secretaries can also commit to UCI given their roles. 

Frank Rosenblatt, a retired lieutenant colonel who also served in the Army Judge Advocate General's Corps and is now the president of the National Institute of Military Justice, disagreed that the disclosure of polygraph information violated the Privacy Act. Instead, he raised concerns about using polygraph data, which is not admissible as evidence in court, to go after the general officer publicly. 

"This unreliable junk information is being allowed to stand in for like actual evidence that he's done something," Rosenblatt said.

On Thursday morning, chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell posted a statement to his official X account saying the department has "zero tolerance for the intentional, unauthorized disclosure of classified information." 

But Parnell's statement marked a notable departure from the earlier, more detailed account provided by the official, who identified Sylvia by name, accused him of leaking classified information and disclosed that he had allegedly failed three polygraph examinations.

While the earlier statement described specific allegations against Sylvia, Parnell's subsequent statement did not identify the general or repeat those allegations. 

Parnell's statement did introduce a new detail that the firing of Sylvia followed an "extensive investigation by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations." 

More than 20 generals, admirals and civilian defense leaders have been fired or departed their jobs since Hegseth, the former Fox News host and National Guard veteran, became defense secretary at the beginning of the second Trump administration. 

Hegseth has pursued an aggressive effort to identify officials suspected of leaking information to the news media. Last month, CBS News reported that some of the highest-ranking officials in the U.S. military were subjected to polygraph tests as part of a sweeping leak probe over news reporting of low stockpile munitions tied to the Iran war. 

But Hegseth also has a history of accusing people of leaking classified information to the press, where investigations determined that the allegations were unfounded. 

Last year, Dan Caldwell, Darin Selnick and Colin Carroll were drummed out of their jobs at the Pentagon and accused of leaking classified information to the media. 

Hegseth appeared on his old network, Fox News, and said that he dismissed the men before evidence was produced by the ongoing investigation.

"When you dismiss people who we believe are leaking classified information, and again, the investigation is ongoing and that will take time and when the evidence is produced it will go to DoJ … once a leaker, always a leaker … and if those people are exonerated, fantastic, but we don't think, based on what we understand, it's going to be a good day for a number of those individuals because of what was found in the investigation," said Hegseth. 

None of the three men Hegseth accused of leaking classified information were charged with a crime. Caldwell later rejoined the Trump administration to work for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. 

Hegseth fires another top military general as critics raise alarm

(01:41)