[Cboldt]

Courts have the inherent power of incarceration, without resort to any statute at all. If you refuse to do what a judge says, you go to jail until you comply. That is called "civil contempt."

This judge ordered her to violate her religion (or choose between it and working for the state in this capacity), and she refused. That is classic contempt.

There is no definite time limit, although the legal principle is that a judge must cease incarceration when it is clear that incarceration will not produce compliance. That is a battle of wills. The judge sees the law as superior, Davis sees her religion as superior.

This is typical judicial behavior - they are arrogant bullies, using "the law" as some sort of be-all, end-all.

[ReaganGeneration2]

That’s a good analysis.

And it seems she has more good rationale for her non-compliance. It seems he should release her if his only answer is “rule of law”, when there actually is no law (yet).

Let’s hope her lawyers make him point to nothing but his own fiat as “law”.

[publius911]

This is typical judicial behavior - they are arrogant bullies, using "the law" as some sort of be-all, end-all [personal playground!]

There.
Fixed it for ya.