Yup.

His statement on Natural Law not superseding the court was damning.

She is an elected official thus her bosses are the voters of that county. She IS the boss of that office.

One news account of her hearing stated, "In court documents filed Wednesday, her attorneys argue that she shouldn't be held in contempt. Instead, they argued, there are alternatives that would allow couples to get marriage licenses in Rowan County without going against Davis' religious beliefs. Among the options they offered were allowing other officials to issue marriage licenses in the county, distributing marriage licenses at the state level or changing marriage license forms to remove Davis' name." http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/03/politic...

Despite the other legal options that could have satisfied the ultimate civil rights goals of both the Court Clerk and the gay petitioners, the Federal Judge jailed the clerk for civil contempt UNTIL she agreed to affix her signature on the documents.

The highest ethical calling for any judge and best practice in the pursuit of civil justice in a case such as this one is served by making every endeavor to find a lawful and acceptable solution which protects the civil rights of all parties involved and not defaulting to Draconian measures. This Federal judge was throwing his weight around--just because he could. May not frighten some of you people but it frightens the hell out of me--especially the concept of indefinite imprisonment for non-violent civil contempt of court, contempt being determined solely by ONE individual.

I think it was John Grisham who made the pithy joke that the Statue of Justice is blindfolded because she can't bear to look at what judges and lawyers actually do to The Law.

"Federal judge ordered her to sign the certificate, she said, "NO", he said off to jail!"
That sounds bogus to me. They could fire her and run an ad just as you would in any case of employee insubordination. If this happened in private sector it would be resolved within 24 hours.

I find that last line about natural law being subservient to the court's authority frightening.

She's in the pokey for contempt of court, CG. Federal judge ordered her to sign the certificate, she said, "NO", he said off to jail!

That said no one need believe in anything, even so using the benefit that there are certain things outside man's ability to screw up is a strong benefit even if it is a fallacy.

This is the exact mentality, the part I quoted, that the Founding Fathers protected against by placing man's Rights as assigned by God - above the ability of man to alter or infringe upon. If the rights aren't inalienable then people like this judge will use any excuse to assert their will, the federal governments will on the State and the Individual.

I heard something about the story, but I don't get how she ended up in jail. Is that the normal remedy when someone in her position doesn't do her job? Don't they have a procedure to deal with someone who doesn't do her job for non-political reasons, i.e. comes in late, shows up hungover, uses foul language at work, reads Facebook all day instead of working, or whatever?

I have known of several electronics people who risked their jobs because they refused to ship boards used in medical applications that had known flaws. One guy lost his job. They didn't go to jail.

Objecting to something your boss wants you to do is normal. They should resign or be fired and go to work somewhere doing something they believe in.