A Kentucky woman who has been banned from her children’s school will be represented in a federal lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky.

In December, Elizabeth Jones, who has two children attending school in the Jenkins Independent School District, was served with a letter from the district’s attorney that prohibited her from coming on school property or attending district activities.

The reason given in the letter, which was hand-delivered to her home by a school resource officer, was “your multiple posts on social media of students participating extracurricular activities which appear to be harassment and which have caused disruptions of the educational process.”

The letter stated that if Jones was caught on school property or at a district-sponsored activity, she would be removed by law enforcement, and the district said it would file charges for trespassing.

On Jan. 5, Jones filed a lawsuit against the school district in U.S. District Court in London, alleging violation of her rights under the first and fourteenth amendments, and stating that the district was retaliating against her.

“As a single mother, it is very painful to have to miss my kids’ activities,” Jones said in a news release Tuesday. “I have not threatened or harassed anyone, especially any students, on my channel, and there is no reason to keep me from attending school events like any other parent.”

Jones, of Letcher County, runs the Hillbilly Crime podcast and social media channels and has made multiple posts about the criminal case against former Letcher County Sheriff Shawn “Mickey” Stines, who shot and killed District Judge Kevin Mullins in September 2024.

“Jones is a citizen journalist who posts frequently about criminal justice issues in and around the community, including a pending case against the former Letcher County Sheriff,” the ACLU’s news release stated. “She is also an involved parent to two students in the Jenkins Independent School District, and she enjoys photographing her children’s activities and sharing those photographs online.”

She says in the lawsuit that her attendance at school events “was peaceful, lawful and without incident.”

Before she received the letter banning her from the schools, the suit says Jones was never accused of violence, threats, violating the law or violating school policy, and it says she was not notified of any investigation against her.

The suit says there was no due process for disputing the ban, which the suit claims represents an “abuse of executive power.”

Jones’ lawsuit names as defendants the school district, superintendent, assistant superintendent, members of the board of education, attorney for the district and the school resource officer.

Attorney Jennifer L. Taylor was initially providing legal representation for Jones, but on Feb. 27, U.S. District Judge David Bunning suspended her from practicing before the court in the Eastern District, and she was removed from the case, court records indicate.

The ACLU announced in the news release Tuesday that it would represent Jones in the lawsuit.

“The ACLU of Kentucky has a long tradition of protecting individual liberties in the Commonwealth,” Corey Shapiro, legal director for the ACLU of Kentucky, said in the release. “We look forward to assisting Ms. Jones in vindicating her free speech rights.”

In its answer to the lawsuit, the school district and its officials deny wrongdoing and say they acted in good faith and in accordance with the law.

“The Board imposed this ban following multiple social media posts in which Jones appeared to be harassing children,” court documents filed by the board state. “These posts disrupted the educational process, and they jeopardized the safety and well-being of students, fans, and visitors of school property.”

The school district says though Jones “may feel entitled to attend her children’s school for school-related activities or sporting events, she has no protected liberty interest in doing so.”

Attorneys for the district claim in court filings that Jones is still “able to communicate with her children’s teachers and able to make informed decisions related to their education. However, her right to direct and control her children’s education does not entitle her to go on school property, nor does it entitle her, or her children, to the most enriching educational experience. The ban does not deprive Plaintiff of any protected liberty interest, and, as a result, she was not entitled to procedural due process prior to be being banned from school property.”

“The Board has the broad authority to control school property, including those who access it. It is not required to grant Plaintiff free access to school property, and Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights do not guarantee her the right to unfettered access to school property,” attorneys for the defendants wrote in a memo supporting a motion asking the court to dismiss some of the claims in Jones’ suit. “The Board exercised this discretion — and acted in furtherance of its duty to promote education — by banning Plaintiff from school property.”

Herald-Leader education writer Valarie Honeycutt Spears contributed to this report.