Skip to content

Judge Jacqueline Ricciani

Kingston Kommisar Whacky Jacky faces backlash for sweeping gag orders critics call unconstitutional prior restraint in Ulster County Court.

Kingston Kommisar Whacky Jacky’s Gag Crackdown

    Ulster County’s Family Court is back in the spotlight, and Judge Jacqueline Racciani—now branded “Whacky Jacky” by watchdogs—is at the center of a constitutional firestorm. Her sweeping gag orders, issued from a courthouse that is legally a public forum, have ignited outrage from civil liberties advocates who say she is trampling the First Amendment with reckless abandon. Critics argue she is running a private courtroom in open defiance of state law, targeting parents, attorneys, journalists, and even observers like advocate Dave Weigel. The Blog’s legal team calls her rulings “prior restraints in robes”—and a threat to every New Yorker’s rights.

    Judge Jacqueline Ricciani

      Ulster County Family Court is facing intense public scrutiny as Judge Jacqueline Ricciani prepares for a high-stakes emergency hearing involving attorney Elizabeth Faulkner, attorney Heather Harp, and Kingston resident Paul Gillis. Critics claim the trio has orchestrated an “opaque and alarming custody campaign,” raising questions about secrecy, emergency procedures, and alleged misuse of parens patriae powers. A popular watchdog blog has amplified these concerns, accusing court insiders of shielding questionable decisions from public view. With a new hearing set for November 19, pressure mounts on Judge Ricciani as citizens demand transparency, accountability, and protection for the child at the center of the dispute.

      Judge Sarah Rakov

        Ulster County Family Court Judge Sarah Rakov is under scrutiny for an emergency custody order that critics say stripped a mother of her rights without due process. The order—signed at the request of attorney Elizabeth Faulkner—was issued without a child-protective-services referral or evidentiary hearing. Court observers argue the move violated fundamental constitutional safeguards and mirrors a wider pattern of questionable emergency rulings across New York’s family courts. Rakov later recused herself, prompting questions about transparency, oversight, and how an order of such magnitude could have been signed in the first place.