Texas Judge Orders 19-Year-Old to Marry Girlfriend or Go to Jail

Court-ordered shotgun wedding?



A judge in Texas ordered a young man to marry his girlfriend or spend the next 15 days in jail. The judge also made him write Bible verses as part of his probation.

KLTV in Smith County, Texas, reports that the young man, Josten Bundy, had gotten into a fight with his girlfriend's ex-boyfriend. While the ex-beau did not require medical attention, he pressed charges, bringing Bundy to court in July:

At his sentencing hearing, Judge Randall Rogers asked Bundy about the fight.

"Is she worth it?" Judge Rogers asked Bundy, according to court transcripts.

"I said, well to be honest, sir, I was raised with four sisters and if any man was talking to a woman like that," recalled Bundy,  "I'd probably do the same thing."

Judge Rogers asked Bundy if he was married to Jaynes and then said, "You know, as a part of my probation, you're going to have to marry her…within 30 days."

If Bundy declined to do the probation, he would be sentenced to 15 days in jail.

"He offered me fifteen days in jail and that would have been fine and I asked if I could call my job [to let them know]," said Bundy. "The judge told me 'nope, that's not how this works.'"

Jaynes, who was in the courtroom said the proposal from the judge embarrassed her.

"My face was so red, people behind me were laughing," said Jaynes. "[The judge] made me stand up in court."

Afraid of Bundy losing his job if he spent two weeks behind bars, the couple applied for their marriage license and scheduled a date with the justice of the peace to get married.

The couple told KLTV that they had spoken of marriage while dating, but had not set a date. With only 18 days to plan the wedding, neither had time to assemble the guests—or attire—they had imagined. Bundy's dad and sisters couldn't make it on such short notice. Bride Elizabeth Jaynes didn't even have time to get the white dress she wanted. And Bundy had to say goodbye to a longstanding sartorial dream, too: "I would have worn a black tux with some yellow under it because I'm a Steelers fan."

No word on whether the judge was invited.

NEXT: "Clothes are freedom—freedom to choose how we present ourselves to the world; freedom to blur the lines between man and woman, old and young, rich and poor."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Sounds fancier than my wedding.

    1. You didn’t spring for the fancy “voluntary” package?

  2. If Bundy declined to do the probation, he would be sentenced to 15 days in jail.

    Deal of a lifetime.

    1. 15 days or a life sentence? your choice

      1. Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.

    2. Since the marriage was coerced and not freely entered into, it should be easy to annul.

      1. Jesus, man. You gotta wait a few anniversaries before bringing up annul.

  3. “I would have worn a black tux with some yellow under it because I’m a Steelers fan.”

    Well, there you go, then.

    1. Judging by location and the Stillers record against the Cowboys in Super Bowls, it’s probably a good thing he didn’t mention this fact to the judge.

      1. Got 6 trophies? Didn’t think so.

  4. Judge is a butthole, but we need pictures before we can decide “Good deal or bad deal?”

    1. Upon research, not a good deal. Well, maybe for that guy:


      1. KEVIN JAMES. Did I not just say Kevin James?

      2. American Christianity is ISIS, only with a love of consumer durables and bacon

        1. Yes, because American Christianity supports this stupidity.

        2. Yeah, and minus the beheadings, crucifictions, the Jizya tax, and a whole load of other things, they’re exactly the same.

        3. Man, an internet commenter managed to be even dumber than this judge.

          Quite the accomplishment.

          1. Too be fair, I did pick the worst one.

      3. 19 and already sporting the haircut of a 55 year old woman? Not a good sign.

      4. Wait, is 19 her age or number of cats?

  5. Forced marriage is the best marriage.

    1. Straight from the FYTW clause of Article 437 of the US Konstitushun, yes?

  6. Soon to be optioned and turned into a comedy starring Kevin James.

  7. Jeez, why couldn’t they have just taken their problems to Jerry Springer like everyone else.

  8. On the plus side House Bundy has just solidified its hold on the North.

    1. East Texas is an odd place. Guarantee yOu this wouldn’t happen west of the metroplex.*

      *No way in hell would a judge out here give the guy 30 days to plan.

      1. I’ll bet that faggot judge is a closet Texans fan….

        1. I don’t think anybody in Tyler is a Houston fan after the Oilers left.

  9. “…then, by the power invested in me by the great state of Texas, you are hereby ordered to kiss the bride.”

  10. I applaud the guy’s chivalry.

    The dumb bastard.

  11. The mobile Fox affiliate page? Does Lenore do her posts from her cell phone?

  12. Bobby gets caught doing dirty with the Judge’s daughter. The Judge says: “Make an honest woman outta my Linda Lou or I’ll send ya up the river for 50 years”. So he marries her. On their 50th anniversary, he starts weeping gently.

    “Oh, honey” Linda Lou says “I’m so glad you’re so moved by this special day.”

    Bobby says “You’re not kidding. If I hadn’t married you, I’d be free today.”

    1. With apologies to Blanche Knott…

      1. I’m picturing “Pootie Tang”

        1. Wah dah ta.

  13. So he’s got to marry her give her half his stuff or go to jail for a couple weeks. I guess he doesn’t have much stuff.

    1. He’ll have even less when the inevitable divorce happens.

    2. Texas is not a community property state.

      1. Texas is a community property state. trust me.

  14. Another judge in need of a good chipping.

    1. I’ll be investigating this comment.

  15. I heard that this judge was bleeding from his eyes and – wherever. So lucky the guy only got shoved into marriage out of the deal.

  16. The “judge” was acting outside of his judicial authority and can, therefore, be sued personally for his actions. Ever hear of the 13th Amendment? The bride was not part of the case.

    1. And yet they went along with it instead of sending him to the woodchippers.

    2. Are you talking about that document that’s, like, 100 years old and stuff?

      *wrinkles nose*

      Ewwwwwww! Dead white slaveholders! Living Constitution! The law is what the judge says it is! Duh!

    3. Sovereign immunity, bitches. A judge could murder you in the middle of the courtroom and not be held accountable. Well, almost.

    4. As long as the shotgun used in the shotgun wedding was not manufactured in Texas the Commerce Clause has this one covered.

    5. Who would sue him? The judge was offering the defendant a better deal than he would otherwise have gotten, so I don’t think the defendant is going to argue that he should have just been sent to jail for 15 days.

  17. So this sounds monstrously illegal for about 50 reasons.

    In July, a Smith County judge sentenced Josten Bundy to get married to his 19-year-old girlfriend as part of his probation, which also included writing Bible verses and getting counseling.

    I don’t know why they’re listening to this judge when they could clearly just sue him on First Amendment grounds.

    1. Because they’re exactly the kind of fucking retards who should be blamed for the existence of the state.

      1. A pair of 19 year old kids should be blamed for the state? I bet neither had even voted in their life.

        1. They went along with an insanely illegal court order. So yes, they’re part of the problem.

          1. “Do this or go to jail.”

            That’s a tough pill to swallow for almost anybody. It’s especially tough for an impressionable young adult that’s looking at the rest of his life and probably weighing what it would be like starting it with a prison sentence. What would you have done? At that age of ignorance, especially?

            Every officer of the court in this case is considerably worse than the pair of 19 year olds.

            1. Are the shepherds worse than the sheep? Yes. Is it the fault of the sheep that the shepherds can continue to exist? Yes.

              1. Serious question, so that I don’t misinterpret you: with that statement, are you condemning all non-anarchists?

                1. Morally? Well, obviously.

                  1. It seems profoundly arrogant to me to declare that the vast, vast majority of people deserve, or are at least morally culpable for, government abuse for not holding a fringe world view that they may never even have been exposed to.

                    1. I never said they deserved government abuse. I said they were the reason it keeps happening.

                    2. Gojira|8.10.15 @ 10:57AM|#

                      Serious question, so that I don’t misinterpret you: with that statement, are you condemning all non-anarchists?

                      Just say Nikki|8.10.15 @ 11:00AM|#

                      Morally? Well, obviously.

                      Which is why I said, “…or are at least morally culpable for…”.

                      And it really, really does come across like you think they deserve it. If you didn’t intend it that way, fine. If I’m the only one reading it that way, then fine. But I would hazard a guess that it looks that way to other readers, as well.

                    3. Yes, it comes of across as they deserve it for not dying on Nikki’s hill.

                    4. Do they not deserve the government they allow?

                    5. Are there not woodchippers in Texas? Do these kids not know how to use one?

                    6. I rented one a few days ago. I suppose I could schlep it down there.

                    7. No one deserves the state.

                    8. Those who enforce for the state do. Those who worship the state do.

              2. Well, that’s why we didn’t let 18-year-olds and women vote back in the day. You need to get a few years under you and a set of balls big enough to tell the state to go fuck itself before you start participating in the political process.

          2. People don’t have the responsibility to martyr themselves.

            1. He doesn’t have to martyr himself. He has to say, “okay, judge, I’ll marry her,” then walk out and no do it while his lawyer appeals the illegal order.

              1. That won’t cost much. Only every penny they and their parents have.

                Just do it, then get an annulment after the 15 days. You can do that pro se, the forms are simple. Don’t ask how I know.

              2. He doesn’t have to martyr himself. He has to say, “okay, judge, I’ll marry her,” then walk out and no do it while his lawyer appeals the illegal order.

                Don’t you mean sit in jail for contempt while his lawyer appeals the order?

                1. The horror of wanting people to actually be civilly disobedient!

                  This is exactly my point. It wasn’t worth it to him to fight. And that’s why the state is what it is.

                  1. Thank God for the one principled man who will fight these things just because they are wrong. As the crony said:

                    “There’s always a confused soul that thinks that one man can make a difference. And you have to kill him to convince him otherwise. “

                2. I’m guessing Nikki hasn’t spent too much time in the family court/criminal court cyclone. Old Man has it pretty much right.

                  1. Old Man has a lot of experience with “family” courts.

                  2. SO the law becomes meaningless and the state becomes omnipotent because no one can afford justice.

                    Sumthin, sumthin, tyrants and fertilizer.

                    1. That’s pretty much it, yes.

                    2. SO the law becomes meaningless and the state becomes omnipotent because no one can afford justice.


                    3. The tree of liberty must be chopped down periodically and fed into a woodchipper. Woodchips are the mulch upon which tyranny is built.

          3. Sure, he could have fought it. But he would have completed the 15 days in jail and lost his job before he could have gotten any higher court to give a shit about his case.

        2. Millennials, dude. They run everything with their incessant poll-taking.

        3. I bet neither had even voted in their life.

          Silence = consent! (I read that on someone’s bumper i think.)

    2. He’s listening because that judge knows all of the prosecutors around. And all the cops. And all of the bail bondsmen. And the defendant knows to defy him or sue him would result in a rain of hellfire on him and his family not seen since the bible verses he’s copying.

      1. “Nice little life ya got there….”

  18. So this is what implementing Sharia Law looks like.

    1. No, implementing sharia would look like Bundy’s family paying diyya to the ex-boyfriend as restitution for the fight. And the ex-boyfriend, girlfriend, and Bundy all sentenced to 100 lashes for the crime of fornication as per the 24th sura of the Qu’ran.

  19. “[I felt] anger; I was mad. [The judge] can’t do this by court ordering somebody to be married,” said Kenneth Jaynes. “I contacted a couple of lawyers but they told me someone was trying to pull my leg?that judges don’t court order somebody to get married.”

    So her dad’s like ‘how can he do this’ and all the lawyers are like ‘he can’t’ and they’re still going through with it even though everyone agrees it’s illegal.

    Geniuses all around.

    1. The son was going to lose his job if he spent 2 weeks in jail. That’s an important consideration for a newly married young man.

    2. What the judge *can* do is say “OK, fifteen days in jail it is.”

    3. His (legal) alternative was to spend two weeks in jail for the assault of the ex-boyfriend, so he made his choices.

  20. Doesn’t the broad get a say in the deal? What the hell? Sure, he can propose, but can’t she say no? How the hell can the judge force the girl to accept the propsal?

    Wait, where are the femenists? Why don’t we have a shitscreamTwitterragestorm (TM) abut the war on women? She isn’t something that the judge can simply give away. What the hell?!

    1. I predict SJWs will ignore it. Personally, I cannot think of anything more creepy than an actual Terminator walking naked down the street on the way to the gun store.

      The control issues are mind-blowing. What if a couple comes in front of this judge after getting into a fight? Does he then order them to get a divorce? Is this judge the final arbiter of every relationship in the county?

      There’s little effective difference. Marriage/divorce/hand over yer daughter and walk away quietly, pal…

      1. … than if it was…


      2. Is this judge the final arbiter of every relationship in the county?

        Pretty much. As long as he has the power to charge you, judge you, and sentence you for contempt, he’s in charge. You might get that overturned later, but you’re in jail and you’ve gone bankrupt trying to pay lawyers.

        1. We should abandon all pretense. An openly fascist banana republic where bribery and corruption were the name of the game has the benefit of being honest.

          1. At the very least, you could actually bribe somebody without a good chance of having additional criminal charges leveled at you for the attempt if it was found out.

            1. “Your Honor, I’d like to share with you some thoughts by Alexander Ham…I mean Harriet Tubman.”

            2. Bribery would probably be cheaper.

      3. Very telling that it’s all to make an assault committed on behalf of the woman’s honor go away.

        I wonder what kind of deal the judge offers if you shoot your wife’s lover after you walk in on them having an affair. “Well, I would have done the same thing, so you can stay out of jail if you promise to keep her pussy on lockdown now.”

        1. The boy acted s her owner, it is proper he take legal possession of her.

          1. Ownership? Oh, gimme a break. Nothing wrong with defending someone you care about.

        2. What does it tell you, Nikki? For example: privileging (the defense of) women’s negative liberty, or “pussy lockdown”?

    2. Wait, where are the femenists? Why don’t we have a shitscreamTwitterragestorm (TM) abut the war on women? She isn’t something that the judge can simply give away. What the hell?!

      It’s possible that these two are lower-class whites, IOW, no reason for anyone to get upset.

    3. Sure, he can propose, but can’t she say no? How the hell can the judge force the girl to accept the propsal?

      Yes, she can say not. And he can’t force her. Which means that she has the power to decide whether he goes to jail or not.

  21. Infini looks like a movie that would appeal to scifi spatter gore lovers.


    I will see it.

    1. Looks like a cross between Aliens and The Thing.

      I’m in.

      1. Infini’s initial setup of most of humanity living in poverty and taking dangerous jobs to survive makes for an interesting setting with many avenues of potential, which makes it rather frustrating that it has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the rest of the film. After a promising start, many great ideas are disregarded or forgotten, in particular the idea of slipstreaming, teleporting by way of matter being turned into information and transmitted anywhere in the universe. Nothing is made of the dangers proclaimed (“data corruption”), while the associated time dilation, meaning that what takes place in a matter of minutes on Earth plays out over hours and days from the perspective of those transported (presumably for reasons to do with relativity but without any accompanying explanation), has no true relevance to the plot. It’s like someone mapped out an intriguing sci-fi world complete with neat touches, but was then unable to tell an actual story within it, so instead opted for a simple ‘search and rescue mission gone wrong’ plot, but in space.

        Or they could’ve made the movie eight hours long and not sold a single ticket.

        1. I’m kind of having that same problem, actually. I love the carpocalypse genre, and have come up with a really cool “universe” to set one in. And… I have no story to tell. It’s very frustrating. :-/

        2. Are not relativistic effects as described completely backwards?

  22. Is the bride in the photo using a magazine-fed pump shotgun?

    Pretty nice….

    1. I didn’t even know such a thing existed until I saw the pic and then looked it up.

      1. They got conversions for normal pumps as well, but I think the jury is still out on how practical they are. OR functional.
        Or buy a Saiga and have it tuned.

        1. I’d be happy with one of these.

          1. Yes, we ALL would. Too bad they are fucking impossible to get a hold of one, and if you DO find someone who would sell, you will pay out the nose for it.
            Not to mention it is fully auto, so register with the ATF and drop off a set of house-keys while you’re at it.

            1. IT occurs to me that the AA-12 is an example of market failure. People want that fucking gun so I would imagine someone else would come out with a viable competitor. But no one really has…

              1. It’s not a market failure when the ATF bans your product and no one makes a replacement.

              2. Saiga 12 is the closest thing. Recoils more though. But semi auto so it’s affordable. Being semi doesn’t really hurt a shotgun much as there is so much recoil going on. There are youtube videos showing a comparison between the two.

                Actually, the AA-12 doesn’t even use 2 3/4″ shells, but 2 1/2″. So getting ammo is an issue.

                1. Didn’t know that about the AA-12. Interesting. But I had also heard that its recoil compensation makes the full-auto a breeze to keep on target and as Sarc’s video shows, FPS Russia shoots it one-handed with hardly a ripple.

                2. I have a Saiga 12. Unbelievable firepower.

                  The only problem with a box magazine shotgun is that you can’t keep the mags loaded. Shotshells are soft so leaving them under pressure in the mag springs causes them to go out of round and not feed properly.

                  Other than having to load the mags right before shooting I have had no problems with the thing.

                  1. I found that the same thing happens if you leave shotshells loaded in a tube magazine for long enough (several months) – they start to deform under the pressure of the tube magazine’s spring and leak powder.

                3. Of course it’s now illegal to import the Saiga, which is effectively a ban.

                  I think the VEPR-12 is still possible to find new and might have escaped the recent Russian gun import ban. It doesn’t cost much more than the Saiga, and is an overall better shotgun.

          2. No seelect fire! THEES ees your seelect fire!

  23. It’s judges like this who should be taken out back and shot.

    1. Metaphorically speaking, of course…

      1. No, he means it literally. I’ve seen his woodchipper.

    2. It’s judges like this who should be taken out back and shot.


  24. Texas, The Florida of The South

    1. Ooo. I was expecting a lantern jaw and a strong moustache, for some reason. Poor guy.

    2. The forward head, the jowls. An imposing figure on the dais.

    3. He’s just wishing someone had forced a woman to marry him.

    4. Looks like a bullfrog fucked a CPA.

    5. God. No wonder he abuses his position of authority.

  25. There’s nothing saying they have to stay married, I guess. This does seem like an illegal order, though.

    1. Basically, the judge just gave the woman half the guys stuff. That’s what it amounts to. If he’s lucky, he doesn’t have much stuff.

      1. No, not in Texas. Not a community property state.

        1. Wow. So if a couple divorces, I’m not sure how that works. I mean I’m all for it, no one should be able to marry someone and then just take half of their stuff, but in the case of a divorce after a long marriage, it seems like there would have to be some sort of rules for equitable division of property.

          1. I dunno. When my mother left my father after 30 years of marriage, literally the only things she got where her clothes, some mementos that my father didn’t mind giving up, and the cash she emptied from their joint accounts before informing him she was leaving.

            He kept everything else.

            1. I think Texas follows the, “Bitches be crazy, amirite?” school of divorce law.

              1. Women. Can’t live with them, can’t kill them. Except in Texas.

                1. Nope. In Texas women kill men. Usually by parking vehicles on their heads, but shooting has become recently popular. I’m never teaching my wife to shoot. She might get good at it.

                  1. Mine is frighteningly good at it. Keeps me in line for sure.

            2. That’s by far out of the ordinary. Few demographic groups get more plunder, one way or another, than single moms.

        2. So, what you’re saying is she’s entitled to a lot more than half, right?

        3. you keep using that word not

  26. There’s something about Texas judges and Christianity that produce some ridiculous rulings.

  27. A judge in Texas ordered a young man to marry his girlfriend or spend the next 15 days in jail.

    Haahhaahaa. That’s a choice? I hope he had the sense to take the 15 days.

    1. Nope. The judge wouldn’t allow him to call his employer and let them know he’d be out for a couple weeks. So rather than lose his job, he chose the ball and chain.

      1. Hell, 60 days, 15 lashes, and lose your job would still be well over on the good deal side.

      2. Implausible, certainly in pratice. Someone present (girlfriend, etc.) could have called on his behalf. But the employer might have fired him for being sentenced to jail, or just missing work.

    2. Since he would be found hanged in his cell by day 3, the 15 day sentence is like 5 lifetime sentences.

    3. How do you think “I would rather do time than marry you” go over with the girlfriend?

  28. Wait a minute, is it legal in TX to deny the man a phone call over a fist fight?

    1. And what would have stopped the guy’s dad from calling the employer and informing him of the situation?

      I guess knowing this judge he might have written an order telling the dad not to do that.

  29. I’d be inclined to say, “Sure, judge”, then ask the GF to say she turned down his marriage proposal, then move the fuck to another jurisdiction leaving no forwarding address — then have your forward inform the judge that the marriage proposal was turned down, and that the judge’s order was unconstitutional anyway.

    Covers all the bases. GTF outta town and appeal the constitutionality.

    1. Have your * lawyer * inform …

  30. Legal experts say forcing a man to get married is unconstitutional. Apparently that’s considered cruel and unusual punishment.


    I’m here all week. Try the veal.

  31. “While the ex-beau did not require medical attention, he pressed charges, bringing Bundy to court in July”

    Didn’t even require medical attention?

    If you don’t want to get punched in the face for saying stupid shit to a guy’s girlfriend right in front of him, there’s an easy way to avoid that.

    Fighting words. Assumption of risk.

    I kicked a hornet’s nest, and then they stung me!

    Waaaaah! Waaaaah!

  32. Take the jail. Trust me.

  33. I’m sure the Texas State Bar is all over this one, right?

  34. “I said, well to be honest, sir, I was raised with four sisters and if any man was talking to a woman like that,” recalled Bundy, “I’d probably do the same thing.”

    Sounds like an awful redneck soap opera, but I like this guy.

    1. Yeah, got to appreciate that.

    2. This article showed up in my news feed on Facebook, shared by the Texas Libertarian Party, and Josten is my cousin. Seeing the national reaction to this has been a bit hilarious, and the subject of the controversy gives people a huge misconception about that part of East Texas. Tyler, Texas, where this happened, is a city of over 100k and has metro population of over 250k, so it’s not like this was some sort of small town, backwoods thing. It’s strange that judges like this still exist there to all the people from there. We Bundys are not actually from Texas though, but come from Southern California and Phoenix, Az area roots. And most of us have never assimilated to the Texas way of things despite living there for years, so yeah, it’s beyond screwed up to us too — which I am guessing is why they went to the news. . . —— To anyone reading this, Josten was put in a situation where he would have immediately went to jail, and I think he may have even had work later that day. He and his girlfriend live on their own, and just imagine the struggle that it is at their age already, and then multiply that to account for one being in jail and jobless. There will most likely be a follow up story with all of this before it’s said and done when the lawyers do get involved.

  35. Seems like a sort of unconstitutional condition. Two reasons why it’s somewhat materially related to the offense. 1) Marriage tames men, makes offenses less likely (call it the Gilder argument; I’m not sure whether wedding preparations make men more peaceful; actually that seems rather doubtful); 2) if he’s willing to marry her, she is special, and his violence more likely an exception (also arguably more understandable, excused to some extent). 1) and 2) are about prevention, 2) also vaguely about justification and excuse.

    How romantic is it? (Good story (+); married to avoid job loss (-); wrong white dress (-), no sports reference (+);…)

  36. I’m sure in most places this’ll be reported as a happy, feel-good story.

  37. Fight with ex-bf, then a shotgun wedding. Yeah, that marriage will last. Somebody’s going to end up getting chipped, then Judge Rogers will have that on his conscience.

  38. One would hope a judge would know what every Constitutional Law 101 student is taught … a contract entered into under duress or coercion is not legally binding and marriages contracts entered into under such circumstances are especially not enforceable.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.