A federal judge in Washington, D.C., is weighing whether to hold in contempt a veteran journalist who has refused to identify her sources for stories about a Chinese-American scientist who was investigated by the FBI but never charged, The Associated Press reports. The judge ordered former Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge to be interviewed under oath about her sources for a series of stories about Yanping Chen, who was investigated for years on suspicions she may have lied on immigration forms related to work on a Chinese astronaut program. Chen has sued the U.S., aying details about the probe were leaked to damage her reputation. After Herridge refused to divulge to Chen’s lawyers how she acquired her information, the scientist’s attorneys are asking U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper to hold the reporter in contempt. The long-running lawsuit reflects a collision of competing interests: a journalist’s professional obligation to protect sources and an individual’s right to pursue compensation over perceived privacy violations by the government.
The judge acknowledged the stakes in a decision that forced Herridge to be interviewed, writing, “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,” who now works at CBS. Cooper said that “Chen’s need for the requested evidence overcomes Herridge’s qualified First Amendment privilege in this case.” The stories by Herridge were published and aired by Fox in 2017, one year after the Justice Department told Chen she would not face charges in its yearslong investigation into whether she may have concealed her former membership in the Chinese military on U.S. immigration forms. Herridge’s attorney, Patrick Philbin, said that forcing the journalist to turn over her source or sources would destroy her credibility and hurt her career. “The First Amendment interest in protecting journalists’ sources is at its highest in cases, like this, involving reporting on national security,” Philbin wrote in court papers. “And confidentiality is critical for government sources who may face punishment for speaking to the press.”