Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share EP 94 You Shall Not Pass
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
EP 94 You Shall Not Pass
JudgeMental Podcast – EP 94: "You Shall Not Pass"
Christine and Trey are back with another episode packed with judicial drama, legal analysis, and unfiltered commentary on the state of the courts.
In This Episode:
Judge Tiffany Yaar & The Case of No Court Access
The hosts dive into a wild ruling out of Lexington, Kentucky, where a family court judge — frustrated with a non-compliant petitioner who openly declared he would never appear before her court — decided to block both him and his attorney from accessing the electronic case filing system. Christine and Trey break down why the Kentucky Court of Appeals granted emergency relief, why this move was a clear violation of court rules, and what the judge should have done instead (spoiler: civil contempt warrants are a thing, and they work).
Judge Rosie Speedline Gonzalez – A Creative Plea Deal
The hosts revisit the Texas judge who was facing up to 20 years after she had an attorney handcuffed in open court for simply doing her job. The charges were dismissed — in exchange for a lifetime ban from ever running for judge again. Christine and Trey debate whether this amounts to justice, whether judges get special treatment, and what it would look like if the same creative plea deal energy was applied to everyone equally.
The Pride Flag in the Courtroom Debate
Listeners have been asking, and Christine and Trey address it: should any non-official flags — pride, political, or otherwise — be displayed in courtrooms? The hosts share their nuanced takes on judicial neutrality, the appearance of bias, and what courts should really be focused on to rebuild public trust.
The Real Problem with Family Court
Christine goes off (in the best way) on the pattern of family court judges who act more like hall monitors than jurists — vindictive, emotionally reactive, and seemingly unaware that punishing an attorney for a client's behavior is not how the law works. Trey offers some balance, but ultimately agrees: follow the rules, or don't expect litigants to.
Key Takeaways:
A judge cannot restrict access to electronic court filings as a contempt sanction — period.
Civil contempt warrants can and do cross state lines; extradition from another state is not unheard of.
Attorneys represent their clients — punishing the attorney for the client's conduct is a fundamental misunderstanding of how legal representation works.
If you want litigants to follow the rules, judges have to follow them too. (Goose. Gander.)
Rate Judges on the Judge-y App!
The hosts give a shoutout to the listeners who reviewed Judge Tiffany Yaar on Judge-y — 17 reviews in a short period! Keep the reviews coming. Download Judge-y and share your courtroom experiences at judge-y.com and follow @Judgingthejudges for updates.
Join the Judge-y Community
Want your questions answered on air? Join the Judge-y community at judge-y.com and be part of the conversation.
LEGAL DISCLAIMER
The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.
View all episodes
By Christine Miller, Hugh BarrowJudgeMental Podcast – EP 94: "You Shall Not Pass"
Christine and Trey are back with another episode packed with judicial drama, legal analysis, and unfiltered commentary on the state of the courts.
In This Episode:
Judge Tiffany Yaar & The Case of No Court Access
The hosts dive into a wild ruling out of Lexington, Kentucky, where a family court judge — frustrated with a non-compliant petitioner who openly declared he would never appear before her court — decided to block both him and his attorney from accessing the electronic case filing system. Christine and Trey break down why the Kentucky Court of Appeals granted emergency relief, why this move was a clear violation of court rules, and what the judge should have done instead (spoiler: civil contempt warrants are a thing, and they work).
Judge Rosie Speedline Gonzalez – A Creative Plea Deal
The hosts revisit the Texas judge who was facing up to 20 years after she had an attorney handcuffed in open court for simply doing her job. The charges were dismissed — in exchange for a lifetime ban from ever running for judge again. Christine and Trey debate whether this amounts to justice, whether judges get special treatment, and what it would look like if the same creative plea deal energy was applied to everyone equally.
The Pride Flag in the Courtroom Debate
Listeners have been asking, and Christine and Trey address it: should any non-official flags — pride, political, or otherwise — be displayed in courtrooms? The hosts share their nuanced takes on judicial neutrality, the appearance of bias, and what courts should really be focused on to rebuild public trust.
The Real Problem with Family Court
Christine goes off (in the best way) on the pattern of family court judges who act more like hall monitors than jurists — vindictive, emotionally reactive, and seemingly unaware that punishing an attorney for a client's behavior is not how the law works. Trey offers some balance, but ultimately agrees: follow the rules, or don't expect litigants to.
Key Takeaways:
A judge cannot restrict access to electronic court filings as a contempt sanction — period.
Civil contempt warrants can and do cross state lines; extradition from another state is not unheard of.
Attorneys represent their clients — punishing the attorney for the client's conduct is a fundamental misunderstanding of how legal representation works.
If you want litigants to follow the rules, judges have to follow them too. (Goose. Gander.)
Rate Judges on the Judge-y App!
The hosts give a shoutout to the listeners who reviewed Judge Tiffany Yaar on Judge-y — 17 reviews in a short period! Keep the reviews coming. Download Judge-y and share your courtroom experiences at judge-y.com and follow @Judgingthejudges for updates.
Join the Judge-y Community
Want your questions answered on air? Join the Judge-y community at judge-y.com and be part of the conversation.
LEGAL DISCLAIMER
The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.