SCOTUS Refuses To Block Reporter's Daily Fines Court Ruling

Judge Christopher Cooper and Catherine Herridge

The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to block a lower-court order requiring former Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge to reveal a confidential source or face $800 daily fines, a decision with potential implications for journalists’ ability to protect sources.

The justices issued a brief order denying Herridge’s emergency request, with no reasoning or vote count provided. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh was the only justice to publicly note his dissent and said he would have granted her request. Herridge had refused to disclose her sources for 2017 articles she wrote while at Fox News about the FBI’s investigation of Chinese-American scientist Dr. Yanping Chen. 

The articles reported that the FBI suspected Chen of ties to the Chinese military and possible lies on immigration forms. No charges were ever filed against her.

Chen later sued the FBI and other agencies, alleging Privacy Act violations through leaks to reporters. She sought Herridge’s testimony to identify the sources. Herridge invoked First Amendment protections for newsgathering and refused to comply.

A federal judge in Washington, Christopher R. Cooper, ruled that Chen’s need for the information outweighed Herridge’s journalistic privilege. He held her in civil contempt in 2024 and imposed escalating daily fines until she complies. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the decision, and the full appeals court declined to rehear the case.

First Amendment advocates have expressed alarm over the ruling, arguing it undermines journalists’ ability to promise confidentiality and could chill public-interest reporting.

In response, Fox News Media issued the following statement: 

“Protecting the confidentiality of journalistic sourcing and the integrity of the newsgathering process is fundamental to a free and functioning democracy. While we are deeply disappointed by the Court’s decision, our commitment to defending these critical First Amendment principles remains unwavering and we will be reviewing our options to further fight this injustice.”

In court filings, Chen’s lawyers contended that Herridge was shielding federal officials who allegedly broke the law by leaking sensitive information to harm a private citizen.

Herridge’s attorneys countered that forcing disclosure would destroy her credibility as a journalist and weaken First Amendment safeguards.

Separately from the emergency application, Herridge has asked the Supreme Court to review the underlying merits of the lower courts’ decisions.