While Bickel serves a two-day sentence, her attorneys vow to take her plight to federal court.

"It's ridiculous," said attorney Barry Levinson, who was stunned when his client was carted off to jail. "I'll be damned if I am going to let a judge violate someone's constitutional right."

Bickel became disenchanted with Tower of Jewels, 896 E. Sahara Ave., after a one-carat diamond she had set in a ring fell out one month later. She also claimed the store failed to find a match to a half-carat diamond, which was needed to make a set of earrings.

When the two sides reached an impasse in their efforts to resolve the problem, Bickel took to the sidewalk in front of the store with signs that read, "I have a problem with Tower of Jewels," and "I want my cash back Jack."

Jack Weinstein is the owner of the business.

The dispute landed in District Court last month, when Johnson had to determine whether Bickel had a right to use the sidewalk as a public forum from which to exercise her right to free speech or whether she was trespassing.

Further muddling the dispute is the Sahara boundary line between the city of Las Vegas and Clark County. When the thoroughfare was widened, the county took property on the south side from private landowners; the city on the north side did not.

On Jan. 22, Johnson ruled that the sidewalk on the north side of Sahara still belonged to business owners, including Tower of Jewels.

"The sidewalk located in front of the Tower of Jewels is not and never has been publicly-owned," Johnson wrote in a preliminary injunction issued Jan. 22.

Johnson noted that the south side of Sahara is public property where Bickel was free to picket. Bickel "is not restrained or prohibited from picketing where such demonstrations are conducted on publicly owned areas or she is otherwise permitted by another private landowner," Johnson's court order says.

According to court documents, Bickel's attorneys agreed that she would stop picketing on the sidewalk next to the jewelry store "until this First Amendment issue is resolved in Federal Court."

But Bickel returned twice. Rather than picketing in front of the store, she hoisted her signs and walked from the corner on the north side of Sahara into the middle of the road, each time obeying the pedestrian traffic signal.

"The fact that she is walking across the street, pressing a little button to cross back across the street -- there is nothing wrong with that," Levinson said.

On Tuesday, Johnson ruled that Bickel violated her court order to stay away from the business or impede customers visiting the jewelry store.

"My thoughts on the court's decision is I couldn't agree with it more," Tower of Jewels attorney Aaron Maurice said, adding that the property owner's land includes the corner where the pedestrian signal is located. "She was sanctioned because she went out there and did it again. It shows a complete lack of respect for the court's order."

The American Civil Liberties Union became involved in the arguments for the first time Tuesday.

"This is an issue that obviously goes beyond these two parties," attorney Allen Lichtenstein said. "She (Johnson) suggested that things be stayed pending a resolution of the sidewalk issue in federal court. Now she has held Ms. Bickel in contempt, fined her $500 and ordered her immediately jailed for two days."

Lichtenstein said court rulings have supported his position that the public has jurisdiction over sidewalks, and therefore people have a right to exercise their First Amendment rights.

The courts ruled in 1999 that union members had a right to protest on the sidewalks in front of The Venetian. In the early 2000s, three Nevada Supreme Court justices ruled that smut peddlers were not allowed to distribute handbills in front of the Mirage because the sidewalks were private. Others banned the distributors under the belief that the material was illegal. The case was ultimately dismissed.

The 9th District Court of Appeals in 2003 lifted a city ordinance banning solicitors from the Fremont Street Experience, saying it was unconstitutional.

According to that ruling: "Factors considered in determining whether an area constitutes a traditional public forum for First Amendment purposes are: 1. the actual use and purposes of the property, particularly the status as a public thoroughfare and availability of free public access to the area; 2. the area's physical characteristics, including its location and the existence of clear boundaries delimiting the area; and; 3. traditional or historic use of both the property in question and other similar properties."

Maurice said there was no reason for Bickel to begin picketing the business in the first place. The Better Business Bureau became involved last year in a dispute resolution with Bickel and the jewelry store, and it was decided that Bickel would receive a new one-carat diamond -- valued at about $3,800 -- at a discounted price.

"They were supposed to get it to her in mid-January," Maurice said. "In mid-December she decided she didn't want to do that so she starts protesting."

Before the store filed its first complaint against Bickel, Maurice said, she not only picketed the store, but followed patrons to their cars with her pit bull dog in tow. Attempts to interview Bickel on Tuesday were not successful.

Levinson and Lichtenstein said they plan to take the complaint to federal court.

Contact reporter Adrienne Packer at apacker@reviewjournal.com or (702) 384-8710.