Via MSNBC.com.

Judith Miller, a reporter with the New York Times, has been ordered to jail by a judge for refusing to name her confidential source in the investigation of the leak of an undercover CIA officer’s name.

“Judy Miller has not been accused of a crime or convicted of a crime,” Abrams said. “She has been held in civil contempt of court.”

I’m not sure where this fits into the realm of common sense democracy. Reporters are usually protected from this sort of thing while performing their job but regardless of the whether her source should or should not be named, when a judge or court orders a specific action, then that’s the law. The question is, is the naming of this source a critical component of the investigation into serious wrong-doing and in the best interest of society at large? The reporter’s commitment to her source aside, crimes cannot go unpunished in lieu of getting a news story. Is it the principle of confidentiality at stake here or the supreme rule of law?

Read the full story at MSNBC.com.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,