The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to block a daily $800 fine imposed on former Fox News investigative journalist Catherine Herridge for refusing to disclose a confidential source. The case stems from a 2017 series of reports that examined the ties of Chinese American scientist Yanping Chen to the Chinese military. The fine, which began after a lower court found Herridge in civil contempt, will continue unless she reveals the source of leaked information from an FBI probe into Chen.
Chief Justice John Roberts had temporarily paused the fine while the court considered an emergency appeal. On Thursday, the court rejected Herridge’s bid to stay the penalty, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh noting his support for granting the application. The decision marks a significant development in the ongoing legal battle over journalistic privilege and the protection of sources.
Herridge’s reports for Fox News in 2017 raised questions about whether Chen was using a professional school she founded in Virginia to assist the Chinese government in gathering information about American service members. The investigation, which lasted six years, did not result in charges against Chen. In 2018, she sued the FBI and the Justice Department, alleging violations of the Privacy Act after the leak led to hate mail and death threats.
Fox News Media expressed disappointment in the court’s decision, emphasizing the importance of protecting journalistic sources. “Protecting the confidentiality of journalistic sourcing and the integrity of the newsgathering process is fundamental to a free and functioning democracy,” the network stated, adding that it would review its options to challenge the ruling.
Herridge’s attorneys did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The case has drawn attention from media advocacy groups, who argue that forcing journalists to break promises of confidentiality could deter whistleblowers from coming forward. Bruce Brown, president of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said, “Journalists facing contempt should not have to muster large payments to the court while they seek to vindicate First Amendment rights.”
Chen’s lawyers maintain that the identity of the leaker is crucial to proving their case under the Privacy Act. Attorney Andrew Phillips stated, “Dr. Chen, like any other American citizen, is entitled to discover the identity of the federal official(s) who abused their access to an American’s private information and leaked it to cause her harm.”
Herridge, who previously worked for CBS News and Fox News, now operates as an independent journalist. The Supreme Court’s decision underscores the ongoing tension between press freedoms and the legal obligations of journalists in federal cases.
