In many articles about the FBI’s investigation of Chinese-American scientist Yanping Chen, senior CBS journalist Catherine Herridge was required to reveal the name of her source(s), according to DC federal judge Judge Christopher Cooper. The disclosures were considered to violate Chen’s right to privacy. During her tenure at Fox News in 2017, Herridge had depended on secret sources to get this information.
Regarding Chen’s ties to the Communist Chinese military and her position as president of a publicly financed institution, explosive charges have been made. She allegedly lied about her prior affiliations in order to obtain this post and may now be utilizing it to communicate sensitive information with the Chinese government. Surprisingly, her spouse serves as the dean of the same college. Despite two FBI raids in 2012, the Department of Defense continues to provide the university with over $6 million in taxpayer money.
By maintaining that the press is protected by the First Amendment and that the subpoenas to uncover the source(s) have no legal value to them, Fox and Herridge have resisted this attempt to identify their source(s). An Obama-appointed judge named Judge Cooper sided with Chen more and wrote, “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. 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.”
The judgment further said that “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 only reasonable option left is for Chen to ask Herridge herself.”
The Chen case involved excessively wide subpoenas, thus the court limited their use. But more specific subpoenas are permitted. Chen’s determination to identify the leaker is underlined, despite considerable research and obtaining statements from linked people.
WATCH: Church Leaders PRAYED you’d never see this…
Director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Gabe Rottman expressed his utter disgust of the judgment and its ramifications. He stated: “While the Privacy Act provides essential protections for the public, using it to breach reporter-source confidentiality poses significant risks to a free press.”
