US reporter urges supreme court to halt ruling forcing her to reveal sources or pay $800-a-day fine | Media
More than two years ago, a U.S. district court judge took the extraordinary step of sentencing veteran investigative journalist Catherine Herridge for civil contempt. I order him to pay a high daily fine $800 a day unless he reveals the sources of a series of stories he wrote for Fox News in 2017.
Since then, the case has slowly moved through the appeal process. Suffered a series of defeats with Herridge. On Tuesday, the US court of appeal for the District of Columbia issued a one-sentence decision denying Herridge’s request to stay the February 2024 order disparaging him, in an order issued by district court judge Christopher R Cooper.
As time runs out before the sentence goes into effect, Herridge’s legal team is trying to pull off one more legal maneuver to stave off the sentence. on friday, Herridge petitioned to stay with the US supreme court. The petition was filed by prominent appellate lawyer Paul D Clement, who was hired by Disney to protest the Federal Communications Commission’s investigation into ABC broadcast The View.
Chief justice John Roberts responded to Herridge’s petition as follows: postponement of the decisions of the court of appeal The other side of the case will be given until July 1 to respond to Chinese American scientist Yanping Chen.
“We are pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision to temporarily stay its deeply troubling contempt order,” Fox News said in a statement Friday. “Fox News stands behind the First Amendment and the principle that reporters should be able to do their jobs without the threat of crippling fines or forced disclosure of their sources.”
Press advocates have long been extremely concerned about the complex caseThis stems from a privacy law lawsuit filed by Chen to uncover who might have given Herridge information about the U.S. government’s investigation into his background and a training program he ran in Virginia. Herridge was not named in the lawsuit, but Chen’s lawyers argued that their client could receive justice only if the journalist was forced to reveal how he obtained information about the government’s investigation of Chen.
Herridge, who worked at CBS News after leaving Fox, refused to disclose his sources, believing this amounted to an abdication of his responsibility as a national security journalist; This was a position also supported by press freedom groups. Because there is no federal shield law protecting journalists from having to disclose their sources, this case illustrates the vulnerable position faced by reporters covering sensitive stories with national ramifications.
It remains to be seen whether Herridge would fall victim to the $800-a-day wage or whether his then-employer, Fox News, could afford it.
Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, expressed optimism that the high court would take Herridge’s petition seriously.
“The high court should use this opportunity to make clear that they cannot seize fourth authority to help plaintiffs and prosecutors build their cases,” he told the Guardian on Friday. “Reporter-source confidentiality is the lifeblood of investigative journalism. Whistleblowers in a position to expose abuses will not trust journalists to protect them and will not come forward if they believe reporters will be threatened with financial ruin for not exposing them in court.”
There are few historical precedents for Herridge’s situation.
New York Times reporter Judith Miller in 2005 He remained in prison for 85 days after refusing to reveal a confidential source. The following year, a coalition of news organizations paid $750,000 The move to settle a lawsuit over reporting on an investigation into nuclear scientist Wen Ho Lee came after five journalists were arrested for defamation and ordered to pay $500 a day until they reveal their sources.
