I think that point is that Gaby is a lawyer in the UK, not licensed to practice in the US, and probably not well-versed in California's state laws. So for her to give legal advice about how to not commit a crime in California is a little disingenuous.
Fair enough, I'm largely talking about Gruber doing things like comparing Darbyshire unfavorably to a drunk character from the Simpsons when the analysis I've seen from people who actually practice and teach law for a living has been far more moderate in its assessment of whether Gawker's arguments will fly or not.
Shield law doesn't protect you from committing a crime. The issue here is that Chen is suspected in (or suspected of being complicit in) purchasing stolen goods.
If the phone finder had found the phone and sent photos and info to Gizmodo, they would be protected, but since they purchased the phone they've also committed a crime and have forfeited their journalistic protection.
No one is arguing the State of California can't get the evidence. Just the law states you can't use warrants to get it from journalists, just subpoenas, to allow to filter out items from other sources/stories.
Federal law has an exception. State law doesn't have an explicit one.
Not a lawyer though. This is for the lawyers to decide at this point.