Luke Walker is no fan of the first amendment
He wants his ex-wife locked up for doing some interviews: including with me.
Alisha Clark Walker is a naughty woman: at least if you believe her ex-husband, Luke Walker.
He wants her to pay- literally- to the tune of $80,000, but he’d also like her to be locked up.
What’s her crime? Technically, she didn’t commit a crime because contempt of court is not a crime. He’d like her locked up anyway.
First off, Luke says Alisha owes him money: lots of it.
It’s a nice trick since Alisha is unemployed. I interviewed Alisha last month.
She spoke about that and how a New Yor State judge, Anthony McGinty, used blatant religious bigotry to take away her children.
She talked about how Judge McGinty ignored her ex-husband’s criminal past- he’s a registered sex offender- and how he’s currently living a with dominatrix- which Judge McGinty doesn’t care about either.
Furthermore, she talked about how Judge McGinty issued a draconian protective order which bars her from seeing her children for two years.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that Alisha Clark Walker (DOB: 11/21/1979) observe the following conditions of behavior check applicable paragraphs and sub paragraphs:
Stay away from: the home of {her daughter} (DOB: l0/31/2012) and {her son} (DOB: 03/25/2015); and the school of {her daughter} (DOB: l0/31/2012) and {her son} (DOB:03/25/2015)
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this temporary order of protection shall remain in force until and including February 6, 2025.
Alisha did a lot of talking, and not only on my show. She also appeared with Francesca Amato to do some more talking.
Francesca and Judge McGinty are old friends; they’re so tight she once sued him.
An upstate domestic violence survivor has accused a family court judge of violating her rights by awarding custody of her teen son to her abusive ex — and she claims other female litigants are facing similar fates, an explosive federal lawsuit alleges.
Author and family child advocate Francesca Amato said Ulster County Family Court Judge Anthony McGinty placed her son with a father, who has a 15-page criminal background and now lives in a “one bedroom cottage with 8 people,” according to a federal lawsuit recently filed in the Northern District of New York.
She provided The Post copies of his criminal rap sheet, which included one felony, and five misdemeanors since 1992.
Yet, the teen remains in the custody of his father and allegedly lives in a dangerous neighborhood, per the complaint.
Amato also alleges that McGinty ignored bruises the father purportedly inflicted on their son in January, according to the federal complaint.
Francesca reached out to me after I published my initial article to tell me she has since regained custody of her son. The article was written in 2021. She was one of several women to sue Judge McGinty.
The Post has spoken to four other female domestic violence victims who have not been allowed to regain full custody of their children, despite pleas to McGinty.
Three, including Amato, are still desperately fighting to steer their children back home while two have decided to quietly settle out of court.
Attorney Joshua Douglass believes Ulster County Family Court had no grounds to remove the children from his clients, Amato, Alana Orr, 39, and Deidre Mayr, 37. His three clients are all domestic violence victims who have agreed to share their traumatic experiences and sensitive medical and court records with the Post.
Domestic violence survivor Alana Orr has a pending 2017 federal lawsuit against McGinty, which previously included plaintiffs Amato, Gina Funk, 47, and social worker Jillian Gordon. The court has only allowed Orr’s case to move forward and McGinty is expected to be deposed on the matter today in Syracuse.
Alisha wasn’t done; she even appeared with MaryAnn Petri on her podcast: Slam the Gavel.
All this exercising of free speech was beyond the pale and good ole Luke felt Alisha needed to be locked up.
If that wasn’t bad enough, Alisha posted things on Facebook, in violation of specific instructions from the woman hating Anthony McGinty.
This is all really bad if you live in Iran or North Korea, or if you wind up in the courtroom of the woman hating Judge Anthony McGinty.
There is only one punishment appropriate for Alisha: the slammer.
I reached out to Luke, but he’s shy. I also reached out to his attorney, Leslie Silva, but she didn’t respond. Previously, Ms. Silva claimed she couldn’t respond because there’s a gag order in this case.
“There is a gag Order in this case that my client and I will be adhering too {sic}. I apologize, but we cannot participate due to the Order.” Silva told me.
Ms. Sliva’s new motion- which reasonably asks Alisha to be sent to the slammer for exercising her first amendment rights- clocks in at only 148 pages.
Her motion proves true the old lawyer adage, “Your honor, I didn’t have time make my brief, brief.”
I checked it carefully, and I didn’t find a gag order.
Alisha insists there isn’t one, but there is another order which may indeed send her up the river.
“Going forward, this Court's judgment will provide that neither party shall make any social media posts pertaining to court matters, disparaging information about the other parent and their significant other and may not encourage any third party to do so.” The order states.
Now, she’s done it. Surely, she “disparaged” Luke. It will be up to the woman hating Judge McGinty to decide if correctly calling him a registered sex offender disparages Luke.
Hopefully, she looks good in orange.
"Even where emotional distress is reasonably expected to result, the First Amendment prohibits Congress from punishing political speech intended to harass or intimidate in the broad senses of those words. The Free Speech Clause protects a variety of speech that is intended to trouble or annoy, or to make another timid or fearful. In Snyder v. Phelps , 562 U.S. 443, 131 S.Ct. 1207, 179 L.Ed.2d 172 (2011), for example, the Supreme Court held that protestors at a serviceman's funeral had the right to display signs that read, d. at 448, 461, 131 S.Ct. 1207. In R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul , 505 U.S. 377, 112 S.Ct. 2538, 120 L.Ed.2d 305 (1992), the Court declared unconstitutional a criminal ordinance that prohibited the display of burning crosses, Nazi swastikas, and other symbols that the perpetrator had reasonable grounds to know would arouse ""anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender."" Id. at 380, 391, 112 S.Ct. 2538. Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell , 485 U.S. 46, 108 S.Ct. 876, 99 L.Ed.2d 41 (1988), held that the First Amendment protected a parody that depicted a prominent minister having drunken sex with his mother. Id . at 47-48, 50, 108 S.Ct. 876 ; see also Saxe v. State Coll. Area Sch. Dist. , 240 F.3d 200, 204 (3d Cir. 2001) (Alito, J.) (""There is no categorical ‘harassment exception’ to the First Amendment's free speech clause.""). For this reason, the cyberstalking statute cannot be applied" """Thank God for Dead Soldiers,""" ""God Hates Fags,"" and ""You're Going to Hell."" I"
Thanks for covering my story.