A federal judge this week ruled investigative journalist Catherine Herridge in civil contempt for declining to reveal confidential sources. The decision stems from a series of Fox News reports on an FBI probe into a Chinese American scientist that never produced charges.
While recognizing press freedoms, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper imposed a fine of $800 per day to compel naming of the leakers. However, his order won’t take effect immediately, allowing Herridge time to appeal.
Chen sued the sources’ employer for leaking personal details from her immigration paperwork, related to China’s astronaut program. Chen contends that these immigration officials violated privacy laws by leaking this data.
Chen also argues that “rogue” officials committed misconduct by enabling selective leaks designed not to serve justice, but to smear reputations. Chen’s lawsuit led the court to order Herridge to divulge her sources in August.
Press groups acknowledge Chen’s right to probe the leaks, but they argue that compelling journalists to expose confidential sources deters whistleblowers and impedes exposing future wrongdoing.
Herridge complied with questioning but declined answers that could identify her sources. This stance on the First Amendment explains her contempt ruling as the saga proceeds.
Legal fights over whether journalists should have to divulge sources are rare, though they’ve arisen several times in the last couple of decades in Privacy Act cases like the one filed by Chen. Some lawsuits have ended with a hefty Justice Department settlement in place of a journalist being forced to reveal a source.
Herridge, who was recently laid off by CBS News, published an investigative series for Fox News in 2017 that examined Chen’s ties to the Chinese military and raised questions about whether the scientist was using a professional school she founded in Virginia to help the Chinese government get information about American servicemembers.
The unfolding court battle illustrates tense debates around press freedoms versus personal privacy amid high-profile investigations. It remains to be seen whether Herridge’s appeals to guard her anonymous sources prevail as fines accumulate.
The Associated Press contributed to this article.