Jewish Holiday Hatchet Job: Oregon OAH Ambushes Family Court Watchdog

State agency’s eve-of-Rosh Hashanah legal blitz against reformer Jill Jones-Soderman sparks outrage and calls for accountability.

By Richard Luthmann

Bureaucrats Target Watchdog on Holy Day

In a brazen display of bureaucratic overreach, the Oregon Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) has launched a shockingly heavy-handed crusade against family court watchdog Jill Jones-Soderman.

Jones-Soderman – head of the Foundation for the Child Victims of the Family Courts (FCVFC) and a longtime thorn in the side of judicial corruption – was ambushed with a massive Notice of Hearing on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year.

The timing was no coincidence. Just hours before the holiday, state officials dumped hundreds of pages of legal documents on Jones-Soderman, notifying her of an impending administrative charges hearing the next business day – after Rosh Hashanah.

By all accounts, the paperwork is extraordinary: the Notice of Hearing and attachments run well over 200 pages, an astonishing volume of legalese to charge one woman over a single watchdog letter. It hit her inbox late on a Monday, as offices closed and her family prepared for the sacred day.

Jill Jones-Soderman, an observant Jew, was stunned by the tactical timing.

“Receiving this legal blitz on the eve of a holy day is unconscionable – it’s clearly intended to catch me off guard,” she said in a blistering email response.

The OAH’s holiday surprise gave her virtually no time to consult counsel or respond. Court reform advocates are calling it a calculated ambush designed to muzzle a fierce critic.

As one supporter put it, “What’s their defense, that they could have waited until she was praying in synagogue to pull the rug out? It’s beyond outrageous.”

Jewish Holiday Hatchet Job: Absurd Charges to Protect a Corrupt Court

What exactly is Jones-Soderman accused of? Incredibly, the state is treating a non-profit watchdog letter – essentially an expert’s commentary on a troubling family court case sent to the judge – as if it were a crime.

Amicus submissions are a form of petitioning the judiciary and are thus shielded by the First Amendment’s Petition Clause. The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that the right to petition extends to all branches of government, including the courts. See California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508, 510 (1972) (holding the right to petition extends to “all departments of the Government” and covers access to courts); Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri, 564 U.S. 379, 387 (2011) (lawsuits and grievances constitute petitions protected by the First Amendment when they address matters of public concern); NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415, 429–30 (1963) (characterizing litigation as “a form of political expression” and “a means for achieving the lawful objectives of equality of treatment” under the First Amendment).

Oregon law reinforces this protection: Or. Const. art. I, § 8 broadly protects the right to speak, write, or print freely on any subject, and Oregon courts have held that this provision secures robust protections for advocacy submitted to courts. See State v. Robertson, 649 P.2d 569, 576 (Or. 1982) (recognizing Article I, § 8 provides greater protection than the federal minimum).

Together, these authorities establish that amicus curiae submissions, as formal written appeals to the judiciary, fall squarely within the Petition Clause’s protection.

The OAH isn’t stupid enough to directly assault freedom of speech and petition. But their adminsitrative action has the same impermissible, unlawful, and unconstitutional intent and effect.

The Notice of Hearing claims Jones-Soderman engaged in “the unlawful practice of law” by offering legal advice in Oregon without a license. To add to their confused narrative, OAH also said that Jones-Soderman was practicing psychiatry without a license.

Which one is it?

In plain terms, the agency decided that a letter criticizing apparent court injustices – FREE SPEECH – somehow makes Jones-Soderman an illegal lawyer or doctor, they’re not sure which.

Watch out butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers. You’re next!

This is absurd on its face. For years, Oregon’s family courts have been dogged by complaints of cronyism and bias – Jones-Soderman’s crusade threatened to drag those skeletons into the sunlight. Little wonder the establishment struck back.

Jones-Soderman isn’t an attorney. She’s not a doctor either, and never pretended to be one. She’s a qualified family court expert witness and commentator with decades of experience helping children and parents.

Her non-profit, FCVFC, exists to expose abuse and corruption in family courts. That mission put her in Oregon officials’ crosshairs.

Observers say OAH’s zeal to punish her over a few paragraphs of commentary and amicus advice is pure retaliation, intended to scare off anyone who might hold Oregon’s notoriously corrupt family court system accountable. Tellingly, no parent or child involved ever complained about Jones-Soderman’s help – the uproar comes solely from the officials she dared to challenge.

“They’re protecting their own by trying to silence her,” said a court reform advocate who noted that Jones-Soderman’s letter shone a light on judicial misconduct.

The message from Oregon’s establishment is clear: whistleblowers will be punished, even if it means twisting the law to do it.

Jewish Holiday Hatchet Job: Procedural Pile-On and Public Outcry

The persecution didn’t stop with a single notice. In the weeks that followed, state attorneys doubled down to steamroll Jones-Soderman. They swiftly filed a Motion for Summary Determination – a bid to convict her without even a hearing. The motion brazenly claims there is “no genuine issue of material fact” to even debate, urging the administrative law judge to rule against Jones-Soderman immediately. In other words, Oregon regulators want this done and dusted before she can mount any real defense.

Procedural fairness has been thrown out the window. When Jones-Soderman requested more time to secure counsel and navigate the holiday document dump, OAH officials flatly refused. One email from the agency curtly stated that “the hearing will proceed as scheduled and no continuance will be granted”. The hearing was set just weeks after the Rosh Hashanah ambush, giving her a scant window to respond. It’s the kind of railroad job that has court watchdogs up in arms.

Outraged supporters are rallying to Jones-Soderman’s defense. Court watchers are already mobilizing to scrutinize the upcoming hearing and ensure every twist in this case sees daylight. Advocates urge concerned citizens to flood the OAH with public attention – attend the hearing, write to state lawmakers, and demand this abuse of power be checked.

COURT WATCHERS NEEDED
Hearing Date: September 24, 2025
Hearing Time: 9:00 AM Pacific Time / 12:00 PM Eastern Time
Location: By Telephone:
Hearing Phone Numbers and Access Code:
Toll Free – 1-877-622-4041
ACCESS CODE – 7107124

This battle isn’t just about one whistleblower; it’s a referendum on the right to expose judicial corruption without facing a state-sponsored witch hunt. The public is watching, and it’s not about to let a backroom bureaucracy, family court corruption, and systemic anti-Semitism trample justice in the dark.