FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
The federal appellate court for the D.C. Circuit recently affirmed a ruling requiring investigative journalist Catherine Herridge to disclose the sources for her reporting on scientist Yangping Chen’s alleged ties to the Chinese military while an online college Chen founded received federal funds.
The court got it wrong by holding Herridge in contempt for not burning her sources, and Herridge is rightly seeking a rehearing. Worse yet, the misguided ruling was informed by documents about the FBI’s investigation of Chen that were filed under seal, even though the investigation is over and the documents aren’t classified. The appellate court even held a portion of its hearing to decide whether to order Herridge to testify in closed court.
Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), represented by Schaerr | Jaffe LLP, filed a motion to intervene and unseal the documents and hearing transcript yesterday.
The following statement can be attributed to Seth Stern, director of advocacy for FPF.
“Journalist-source confidentiality is about safeguarding the public’s right to be informed. Its fate should not be decided in secret hearings about secret documents. Americans deserve to know whether the damages Chen claims to have suffered were because of alleged leaks to Herridge or because of the outcome of the government investigation she reported on. If the latter, it raises the question of whether the court is ordering Herridge to out her sources to aid Chen in pursuing a baseless lawsuit. Surely the bar for compelled disclosure of journalistic sources must be higher than that.
“Opponents of the reporter’s privilege often dream up convoluted hypothetical scenarios to call it a national security risk. But here we see someone suspected of ties to a foreign military able to use the courts to try to find out who in the government U.S. reporters are talking to and the content of those conversations. It goes to show that the real national security risk is the lack of a statutory privilege, which allows courts to issue misguided rulings. Congress should step up and reintroduce and pass the PRESS Act.”
H. Christopher Bartolomucci, a partner at Schaerr | Jaffe, added:
“Public access and government accountability are fundamental to the rule of law, and the notion of ‘secret law’ is anathema to our system of justice. By denying the public access to important judicial records in this case, the court is keeping members of the public from judging for themselves the strength or weakness of the court’s reasoning.”
You can read FPF’s motion here.
Please contact us if you would like further comment.
