WASHINGTON -- Judith Miller, a reporter for The New York Times, was sent to jail yesterday for refusing to reveal the name of a confidential source to a grand jury probing the Bush administration's leak of an undercover CIA operative's name.

Gerald Herbert, Associated Press New York Times reporter Judith Miller arrives at Federal Court in Washington yesterday with her attorney, Robert Bennett. Click photo for larger image.

In a surprise move, Matt Cooper, a reporter for Time magazine who was also facing jail, told U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan that his source had called him just before the court convened to release him from his promise of confidentiality. After two years of not talking, Cooper told the judge before a stunned crowd in the courtroom, "I am prepared to testify."

The Supreme Court last month refused to take the two reporters' case, leaving the issue to Hogan. Miller never wrote a word for her newspaper after talking to her source, but Hogan said no one can refuse to tell a grand jury in a federal case what it wants to know and suggested there is a "realistic possibility" confinement may make her change her mind.

Her lawyer, Robert Bennett, said that would not happen.

Miller said, "I do not make confidentiality pledges lightly, but when I do I must honor them." She hugged Bennett, and was taken into custody at once.

"This is a sad day, not only for journalists but for our country," an emotional Cooper told reporters gathered in steamy heat on the courthouse steps. He said his source now wants Cooper to testify. When a friend congratulated him for avoiding jail, Cooper snapped, "There is no 'congratulations.' This is a very sad day."

Bill Keller, executive editor of The New York Times, said that Miller was a courageous reporter "determined to honor her professional commitment" of not revealing a source to whom she promised anonymity.

(top) Bebeto Matthews, Associated Press (bottom) John Kuntz, The Plain Dealer via AP Across the country, reporters demonstrated in support of a free press. In New York City, above, pickets included Pulitzer-prize winner Dana Canedy (holding blue sign) of the New York Times. In Cleveland, below, reporters from the Plain Dealer included, from left, Mark Naymik, Richard Peery and John Kuehner. Click photos for larger image.

"This is a chilling conclusion to an utterly confounding case," Keller said. "It's confounding because of the mystery of what crime has actually been committed and what the special prosecutor hopes to accomplish by the draconian act of punishing an honorable journalist. It is chilling because it's likely to serve future cover-ups" and prevent reporters from investigating difficult stories to learn the truth.

In 2003, Robert Novak, a syndicated columnist, wrote a column about Joseph Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador, who had publicly debunked the Bush administration's claim that Iraq tried to buy nuclear material in Africa that could be used in weapons. In the column, Novak said two administration sources told him that Wilson was married to Valerie Plame, a CIA operative.

After Novak's column, Miller began reporting the story but never wrote about it. Cooper briefly mentioned Plame's name in a story about whether the administration leaked her name to get even for her husband's argument that the administration's raising alarms over weapons of mass destruction was overplayed as an excuse for going to war.

Because it is against the law to identify a spy, a special prosecutor, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, was charged with investigating to find out whether a crime was committed.

Fitzgerald subpoenaed Miller and Cooper to testify before a grand jury and both refused, saying they had promised anonymity to their sources. Fitzgerald said this week, "Journalists are not entitled to promise complete confidentiality -- no one in America is."

Fitzgerald did not publicly target Novak in his investigation and it is not known if Novak has testified to the grand jury. He has never said publicly who his sources were.

Cooper said yesterday he kissed his 6-year-old son goodbye before going to court, telling him he didn't know when he'd be home again. After his son left for camp, Cooper said, his source called him and "personally" and "unambiguously" waived the confidentiality promise.

Cooper still refused to name the source but said he will tell the grand jury. The government claims all Bush administration officials routinely sign waivers of confidentiality in talks with journalists, but Miller and Cooper argue that is not acceptable to them because the officials' bosses coerced their signatures to try to stop leaks.

Floyd Abrams, a First Amendment lawyer for The New York Times, told reporters that legally there are no more steps to be taken on Miller's behalf. However, after she has been in jail for a period without talking, he said, her lawyers may go to Hogan and ask for her early release. Hogan has said she must stay in jail until the grand jury's term expires on Oct. 28.

Fitzgerald has hinted he might try to coerce her more by seeking to turn her civil contempt citation into a criminal proceeding, in which case she could spend as much as six months in jail. Last year, Rhode Island television reporter Jim Taricani was found in criminal contempt for refusing to identify the source of a videotape showing a city official taking a bribe from an undercover FBI informant and was under house arrest for four months.

Fitzgerald opposed a "comfortable" home confinement for Miller saying that a reporter who had covered the war in Iraq was tough enough to endure jail.

The judge did not say where she would be incarcerated, but The Associated Press reported that Miller was seen entering the Alexandria Detention Center. The Virginia facility's best-known resident is convicted terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui.

The Times' Keller said Miller is being sent to jail for "doing her job." She has said that being confined in jail will take her away from her ailing husband but that she was ready to do it for the sake of principle.

"I think this clearly points out the need for some kind of a national shield law," Cooper said. "There is no federal shield law and that is why we find ourselves here today."

A majority of states have some sort of "shield" law that permits reporters on occasion to refuse to disclose the identity of their sources. But because there is no federal law, Hogan said he had no choice but to hold Miller in contempt. He said that respect for the law is paramount or the nation will "descend into anarchy."

There is a bipartisan federal shield bill pending in Congress, but so far there has not been any swelling sentiment to pass it. Many news organizations now have rules against the use of anonymous sources, but they also say there are extenuating circumstances. The Watergate scandal would not have been uncovered without confidential sources.

The proposed "Free Flow of Information Act" would demand that journalists testify only after non-media sources have been exhausted and with the caveat that such testimony is vital to a case.

John Sturm, president and CEO of the Newspaper Association of America, said it's time the bill was passed. "Confidential sources have played a vital role in the reporting process, contributing important information on issues ranging from major safety violations at nuclear plants to corporate fraud. Without the promise of confidentiality, sources, including whistleblowers, will not come forward."