Journalists often claim strong First Amendment protections when refusing to reveal sources—as famously happened with New York Times reporter Judith Miller during the Valerie Plame scandal. But what happens when a federal agency violates a citizen’s privacy and leaks sensitive information? The protections suddenly seem to vanish.

Take the case of Yanping Chen, a Chinese American scientist investigated by the FBI on suspicion of lying on immigration forms. Though never charged, her private information was leaked to Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge, who published details that should have been protected under the Privacy Act. The fallout was devastating: Chen’s reputation was ruined, contracts were canceled, and her business collapsed.

Chen sued, demanding accountability and the identity of the leaker. Herridge refused to reveal her source, citing the First Amendment and claiming much of the information was already public or trivial. However, the appeals court rejected these defenses, emphasizing that privacy violations causing harm can warrant damages and that journalists are not above discovery obligations simply by claiming press privilege.

After nearly a decade, the court ordered Herridge to disclose her source, rejecting her constitutional defenses. This ruling underscores a crucial legal balancing act: protecting free press rights must not come at the expense of citizens’ privacy and due process. It remains to be seen whether Herridge will comply or continue to face contempt fines.