The Media v/s The Law

Nothing and no one is above the Law. Judith Miller begs to differ. Finding herself in the rarest of predicaments this gutsy New York Times reporter would chose to go to jail than reveal the name of her informer.In an unusual case, Judith Miller and co-reporter Mathew Cooper are facing contempt charges because they refuse to reveal the names of their confidential sources.
The Merits of the Case:
A former Diplomat Joseph.C.Wilson contends that Mr.Bush relied on discredited intelligence on Iraq in 2003.
‘A Senior Official in the Bush Administration’ leaked the identity of an undercover CIA operative Valerie Plume to reporter Judith Miller.
Joseph.C.Wilson who happens to be the husband of Valerie Plame claims that her name was exposed as retribution for his earlier contention.
A judicial inquiry was set up to investigate whether or not the Government Official who leaked Valerie Plame had done so unjustly.
Judith Miller was subpoenaed to give the name of her source in the White House.
Judith Miller refuses to disclose the name of her source and is sent to jail.

The question here is weather Judith Miller in her capacity as a media person has the right to blatantly disobey the law. Her stance is that most reporting survives on informants and it is the media persons duty not to betray the confidences of their sources. Not doing so will simply be the death of Free Media as we know it. This would mean that fewer and fewer people would approach the media.
But what kind of precedent are we setting if the court decides that journalists are exempt from the Word of the Law. Her refusing to confide the name of her source, completely stalls the judicial investigation into whether there was foul play by the Bush government.

Is Judith Miller justified in her vow of silence?