Ex-Wife’s Free Speech/Civil Liberties Appeal Illustrates Alex Jones’ Hypocrisy

Ex-Wife’s Free Speech/Civil Liberties Appeal Illustrates Alex Jones’ Hypocrisy

Austin, TX – In what can only be considered an extreme example of hypocrisy, Alex Jones has argued on multiple occasions in Family Court to block his ex-wife Kelly Jones’ free speech and other unalienable rights guaranteed under the Texas and U.S. Constitutions. These aggressive arguments and filings, as well as judicial bias, led to unconstitutional orders being issued almost ten months after the conclusion of the Jones custody case.

Kelly Jones is appealing the final orders issued in the custody suit to the First Texas Court of Appeals, which has agreed to hear the case. Among the significant concerns addressed in the appeal are injunctions on free speech levied against Kelly Jones alone, non-indicated and unconstitutional therapeutic treatment forcefully imposed on her, and high fees for improperly instituted and unnecessary court experts charged to Ms. Jones. In a separate case, she is also suing Alex Jones for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Kelly Jones is an outspoken Family Court justice activist, who won a jury trial in 2017 appointing her as primary parent for the Jones children. From first-hand experience, she speaks out about Family Court corruption. Her ex-husband’s vexatious litigation and aggravated perjury of multiple experts led to her unlawful loss of her children – an illustration of the fact that America desperately needs Family Court reform.

Kelly Jones states, “The unconstitutional provisions in the final order of my custody case should concern all Americans. Free speech in one of our most important and basic rights. I am appealing the order for myself and for all Americans – the Appellate Court’s decision will become case law regarding civil liberties in Family Court.”

Kelly Jones affirms that statutes don’t change, nor does the Constitution disappear, when someone enters Family Court. However, her own experience has been one of corruption and judicial bias in the court.

“Judges cannot write away an American’s basic rights nor deny due process,” says Kelly Jones, “The Constitution is the cornerstone of what makes America safe and free. It is the document that lawyers, judges and the military swear to uphold!”

Kelly Jones implores all attorneys, and particularly civil liberties attorneys, to write amicus briefs in support of her appeal. Not only will this help Ms. Jones’ cause, it may sway the appellate court’s decision and help America. Ms. Jones asserts that “if you have enough money and a great disdain for the Constitution, it is possible to buy away someone’s rights in Family Court. We cannot let that stand. Judges who abuse their power should be investigated – and impeached if found to have violated the Judicial Code.”

Ms. Jones further declares that she has been called “mentally deregulated” for maintaining that she has due process rights. She has been punished by a judge for “not giving the judge more power, which the judge wanted, during an arbitration.”

Section 39.03 of the Texas Penal Code defines official oppression as: “A public servant acting under color of his office or employment (who) commits an offense (which) intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity, knowing his conduct is unlawful.” Ms. Jones asserts that the judge in the case, Orlinda Naranjo, is guilty of official oppression, based on judicial actions and orders issued in the Jones custody case.

“My  ex, Alex Jones, cries ‘censorship’ and holds huge ‘free speech’ donation drives,” explains Ms. Jones, “Yet he spent millions of dollars actively fighting to block my basic parental rights, often stating in court filings and arguing in court that I am ‘delusional’ to care about my free speech. This is not right, not for me or for any American.”