Weaponized Gag Orders: How an OC Judge Is Silencing a Quadriplegic Mother’s Fight for Justice

Nolan v. Nolan – The Case of Taran Strong

Feb 08, 2025

Taran Nolan with her Father and Miss Magical Margie, Taran Strong Facebook Page post. February 6, 2025. Photo by Taran Strong Facebook Page

Today, February 7, at 1:30 p.m., the Nolan v. Nolan case resumed in Orange County Superior Court under Judge Kimberly Carasso. Court watchers arriving in person were questioned about their identities and then denied entry. Officials stated, “This is a closed hearing. You have to leave.”

Meanwhile, journalists Richard Luthmann, Mike Volpe, and I attempted to attend remotely via Zoom. We remained in the virtual waiting room without contact for over 30 minutes before I contacted the clerk, who confirmed the hearing was closed and confidential by court order.

Investigative Journalist Richard Luthmann in OC Dept. L60 Zoom lobby for Nolan case. February 7, 2025. Photo by Richard Luthmann.

Shortly after, I obtained two critical court documents:

"Respondent’s Brief on Recourse and Remedies for Breaches of Orders on Confidentiality," filed by Jimmy Nolan’s attorney, citing case law: “In Anker v. Yeager, a family law attorney was sanctioned $50,000 in a child custody dispute for asking questions regarding a confidential child custody evaluation during a deposition in a separate (but related) case”—used in support of demanding sanctions against Tar Nolan, confirming the threat of sanctions was made on January 31.
Respondent’s Brief on Recourse and Remedies for Breaches of Orders on Confidentiality
A minute order from Judge Carasso requesting transcripts from the January 31 hearing, with the costs covered by the Orange County Superior Court.

After the January 31 hearing suddenly recent minute orders issued by Judge Carasso became “not viewable” on the public court access website. Including the one containing the blanket gag order issued on January 27, pictured below:

Photos by Julie M Anderson Holburn — Nolan vs. Nolan Minute Order, blanket gag order. January 27, 2025.

Judge Carasso’s Gag Order: A Retaliation Against Media Scrutiny?

Sources confirmed that this reporter’s January 26 article, "Update: Tar’s Road to Recovery – Mom Bullied by OC Minors’ Counsel in Fight Over Special Needs Trust", was a major factor leading to Judge Carasso’s blanket gag order on January 27. This article exposed Minors' Counsel’s attempt to access Tar Nolan’s special needs funds for attorney fees and efforts to exclude Tar’s ADA caregiver from court. This article reportedly became an exhibit or a major point of contention in the court proceedings.

After court watchers and I were denied access to every day of the multi-day hearing, I sent an email on January 29 and January 31 to Judge Carasso’s department, questioning why the public and media were entirely blocked. According to sources, within less than an hour of my email, Carasso erupted in anger, berating Tar Nolan and her attorney to the point that Tar left the courtroom in tears. Carasso threatened sanctions, a mistrial, contempt charges, and striking expert witness testimony, specifically targeting Dr. Victoroff, one of Tar’s key expert witnesses.

This reporter previously covered the Nolan case in a series of articles:

Who is Judge Kimberly Carasso?

Judge Kimberly Carasso was appointed to the Orange County Superior Court by Governor Gavin Newsom in July 2024. Before her appointment, she worked at The Law Offices of Marshall Silberberg (2014-2024) and other prominent law firms. She earned her Juris Doctor from California Western School of Law and replaced Judge Stephanie George upon her retirement. Carasso is registered as a Democrat.

→ Read Newsom's appointment announcement

Legal Challenges to Jimmy Nolan’s Attorney’s Confidentiality Arguments

The legal arguments in Jimmy Nolan’s attorney’s brief may be on shaky legal ground. Given the public nature of the parties, their extensive social media presence, pre-existing media coverage, and the timing of the blanket gag order, the brief faces serious constitutional and legal challenges:

1. The Gag Order Was Issued After Public Information Was Already Circulating

Jimmy and Tar Nolan are public figures. Their thousands of social media posts openly discuss their children before and after the accident.
The car accident and children’s condition received extensive media coverage before the gag order.
The gag order followed media exposure of Minors' Counsel’s attempt to access Tar’s special needs trust and exclude her ADA caregiver.
Financial disputes and ADA accommodations are not confidential minor’s matters. Courts issue gag orders to protect children’s private details, not to shield attorneys from scrutiny.

2. The Brief’s Confidentiality Claims Are Weak

Financial and ADA issues do not violate minor’s confidentiality. These matters relate to court procedures, attorney conduct, and financial management, not private medical details about the children.
The Anker v. Yeager case cited in the brief involved a confidential child custody evaluation, whereas this case deals with legal funds and caregiver access, which do not fall under confidentiality protections.

3. Gag Orders Must Be Narrowly Tailored

Courts can enforce reasonable gag orders to protect minors, but they cannot impose sweeping restrictions on public information.
With existing news coverage, an overbroad gag order could be unconstitutional if it restricts speech unrelated to confidentiality concerns.
Legal precedent requires balancing privacy rights with First Amendment protections—especially when a gag order appears aimed at suppressing financial details affecting a disabled parent.

4. Enforcing the Gag Order Could Face Legal Challenges

If Tar Nolan or others discuss legal strategies, financial issues, or ADA rights, enforcement through contempt or sanctions could be challenged as an unconstitutional restriction on speech.
The State Bar’s authority to discipline attorneys does not extend to public interest reporting unless there is a clear violation of professional conduct rules.

Whose Interests Are Really Being Protected?

Nolan v. Nolan is rapidly evolving into a landmark battle over judicial transparency, First Amendment rights, disability rights, and the misuse of gag orders to silence scrutiny. Jimmy Nolan’s attorney appears to be weaponizing confidentiality protections—not to protect the children, but to conceal questionable legal maneuvers by attorneys and the court from public exposure. With growing public attention, Orange County courts may soon be forced to answer for their actions.

If you have experienced similar issues within the California family court system—whether as a whistleblower, victim, or someone impacted by corruption in family court, CPS, probate court, or foster care—please reach out to this reporter at juliea005@proton.me.

This article was made possible by reader support. Donations can be made here. Thank you for standing up for truth and transparency.

Learn more about my ongoing investigative series uncovering corruption in California and its family court system:

OC Father Charged with 13 Felony Fraud Counts; The Victims of Jessica St. Clair, Part Six - Lies, Abuse, and Systemic Collusion

OC Man Charged with 5 Felony Counts of Molestation: Family Court and CPS Ignored Reports for Years

Whistleblowers expose the Orange County family court crisis

Whistleblowers reveal corruption in Orange County family courts and beyond

California’s Family Court Crisis: The Failure of Oversight and the Impact of Dr. Sue Tonkins

Unchecked family policing in California: cps, family court, and foster care under fire

California Family Courts: Dr. Joan Meier Exposes Bias and Systemic Failures

Orange County reunification therapist deceives courts about credentials

OC Bar Association says “I just want to protect my children” means “I just want to screw my ex”

The victims of Jessica St. Clair, part three