Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

A federal judge has ordered a reporter to disclose her sources for an investigative series on an FBI investigation into a Chinese scientist named Yanping Chen, in a rare move that has received pushback from press groups.

Catherine Herridge, currently with CBS News but with Fox News when she reported the stories, must sit for a deposition and answer questions under oath about the identity and intent of the sources for the series, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled.

“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,” Judge Cooper, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, said in a 28-page ruling. “But applying the binding case law of this Circuit, the Court concludes that Chen’s need for the requested evidence overcomes Herridge’s qualified First Amendment privilege in this case.”

Lawyers representing Ms. Herridge and Fox had argued that the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protects journalists from most requests and that Ms. Chen hadn’t met the threshold to override the protection.

‘Balance of Interests’

While previous rulings have found that journalists are protected by the First Amendment, a party may compel information by proving that the information they seek is critical to their case and that they’ve exhausted all other options.

“The balance of interests overwhelmingly favors protecting sources,” the lawyers said. “Plaintiff’s private interest in Privacy Act damages carries no broader public interest. Moreover, given the infirmities in the merits of her case, it is unlikely that Plaintiff can ever establish significant damages at all.”

Since filing the lawsuit against the FBI and other federal agencies, Ms. Chen has been able to take 18 depositions of current and former government employees and obtained declarations from others but has still been unable to confirm Ms. Herridge’s sources. She said she believes an FBI agent, an alleged FBI informant, or other government agents leaked an internal FBI presentation created by the agent to Ms. Herridge.

“The identity of Herridge’s source is central to Chen’s claim, and despite exhaustive discovery, Chen has been unable to ferret out his or her identity,” the judge wrote. “The only reasonable option left is for Chen to ask Herridge herself.”

Fox, CBS, and a lawyer representing Fox and Ms. Herridge didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Press groups decried the ruling.

“Investigative journalism cannot function without credible assurances of confidentiality to sources,” Gabe Rottman, a director at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, told CNN. “While the Privacy Act provides essential protections for the public, using it to breach reporter–source confidentiality poses significant risks to a free press.”

Caitlin Vogus, deputy director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, added that the decision emphasizes the need for legislation called the Protect Reporters from Exploitive State Spying (PRESS) Act, which would ban judges from forcing journalists to reveal their sources. The bill has support from members of both parties, including Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah).

Case Background

Ms. Chen, a naturalized U.S. citizen, founded and owned the University of Management and Technology. Multiple military members attended the university, with the Department of Defense helping pay their tuition.

The FBI, starting in 2010, investigated Ms. Chen. Agents searched Ms. Chen’s home and the university’s main office. In 2016, prosecutors told Ms. Chen’s attorney she would not be charged.

Reporting by Ms. Herridge had focused on Ms. Chen’s alleged ties to the Chinese military, but Ms. Chen had said on immigration documents that she had never been affiliated with the military of the Chinese C*******t Party. The stories also detailed the FBI investigation and said that agents and prosecutors disagreed about how the case was handled.

The Department of Defense moved in 2018 to stop helping pay the tuition of military members to attend Ms. Chen’s university.

Ms. Chen sued the FBI, alleging the leak of information was illegal, violating the Privacy Act.

“Soon after … Chen was informed that no charges would be brought against her, and in violation of federal law,” the suit stated, “one or more agents of the Defendants, who possessed or had access to confidential FBI records pertaining to the investigation, caused the Leaked Records to be disclosed to one or more employees or agents of Fox News.”

gorgehiker Loc: Lexington, Ky

For all of the lovers of our constitution, read the words of Donald Trump:

“A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

What does that have to do with a judge compelling a journalist to reveal sources in a matter that has no national security impact?

cwp3420

Your TDS has moved into the terminal stage. Poor little fella.

gorgehiker Loc: Lexington, Ky

Apparently, sometimes the constitution is important and sometimes it's not.

Drbobcameraguy Loc: Eaton Ohio

Jesus crimeny. You will most likely die when trump does due to your intense relationship with everything Trump and what isn't you make sure it appears to be. Lmao. I don't usually comment on insanity because it's a disease but in this case I could not but comment.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

What are you talking about, I certainly would not support what you have attributed to Trump and I don't know of anyone who would, your mind is running wild, and your previous comment has nothing to do with a federal court mandating that a journalist reveal her sources, there have been several leaks where the government was pressuring journalists to reveal sources and the courts have consistently protected the journalists and their sources based on 1st amendment protections, are you so politically jaded that you cannot see the importance of such protections?

gorgehiker Loc: Lexington, Ky

You don't know of anyone who would support what Trump said. News Flash: somebody must support what Trump says because he is the runaway leader for the Republican candidate for president.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I know of no one who supports the statement you posted, don't play coy gorge.

“A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”

gorgehiker Loc: Lexington, Ky

The leader of the Republican Party called "for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution", and you have no problem with that. I didn't make that statement up. It came directly from Trump. How low can the Republican Party sink?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I have already told you that I don't support that statement and in fact I don't support Trump in the primary, and just incase you are wondering there is no circumstance in which I would ever support the corrupt Joe Biden, so there is that. If it comes down to Trump v Biden you can bet that I will find my way to a polling booth to v**e for Trump.

gorgehiker Loc: Lexington, Ky

We'll just have to cancel each other out because I can't v**e for a guy who wants to terminate the constitution because he lost an e******n.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Well that would work if we lived in the same state... I am pretty sure that Trump will again carry NC but you never know.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

It's not being "attributed" to Trump. He publicly said it. If you v**e for him, you will indeed be supporting it.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

No I won't, if reelected should he blatantly disregard the constitution as brazenly as that you will see me calling for his impeachment and conviction.... Biden is a dirty crook who sold influence to international interests including the CCP and others.... You can tell me there has not yet been shown proof but just relax, it will come.

There can be no denial that democrats support Joe, clearly his attempt to spend $400 billion + on student loan forgiveness was unconstitutional, he knew it, he had previously said it, Pelosi had said it but he moved forward with it and only stopped with the SCOTUS slapped him down.