Meet the Judge: What to Know About Amy Berman Jackson
Roger Stone must explain why his conditions for release and a media contact order placed on him shouldn't be revoked or changed in light of a photo he posted on Instagram that featured Jackson with a crosshair next to her head.
February 20, 2019 at 12:09 PM
4 minute read
Judge Amy Berman Jackson must once again decide whether to revoke the conditions of release for a defendant tied to the special counsel's Russia investigation.
First, it was Paul Manafort. The former Trump campaign chairman found himself behind bars this past summer after he was arraigned on new charges accusing him of attempting to tamper with potential witnesses. The revocation of Manafort's bond came after Jackson, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, already put him on notice in November 2017 over ghostwriting an op-ed for the Ukrainian English newspaper Kyiv Post.
Jackson struck a tone of regret when sending Manafort to jail, saying she thought “long and hard” about the decision. Ultimately, Jackson said she was “troubled” by Manafort's attempts to contact potential witnesses by phone and encrypted messaging.
Now, it's Roger Stone who must explain why his conditions for release and a media contact order placed on him shouldn't be revoked or changed in light of a photo he posted on Instagram that featured Jackson with a crosshair next to her head. The post was taken down, but not before it caught significant social media attention.
Stone's legal team filed an apology with the court, but it was not enough to head off Thursday's hearing before Jackson.
The post came just days after Stone's legal team asked for a new judge. Stone's lawyers questioned the fairness of assigning the case to Jackson instead of randomly assigning it to a judge under local criminal rules. Randomly assigning a judge is an essential element of due process to ensure a fair trial, Stone's lawyers said in their request for a new judge.
Jackson has been handling many of the cases brought by special counsel Robert Mueller III's team as it investigates Russian interference into the 2016 presidential election.
Stone is fighting charges that he lied to congressional investigators probing Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, obstructed justice and tampered with a witness. Those charges were brought by prosecutors working for Mueller and the U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C., Jessie Liu. Their offices are jointly handling Stone's case.
Stone is represented by Fort Lauderdale, Florida-based attorneys Bruce Rogow, Grant Smith of StrategySmith, and Robert Buschel of Buschel & Gibbons. He also has a Washington, D.C.-based attorney, L. Peter Farkas of Halloran Farkas + Kittila.
Jackson is no stranger to the spotlight. She's presided over high-profile cases, including a class action over the Office of Personnel Management's data breach and the Justice Department's blockbuster challenge to Anthem Inc.'s proposed $54 billion acquisition of Cigna Corp.
She also oversaw the 2012 lawsuit for documents tied to the botched gun sting known as “Operation Fast and Furious.” Jackson ruled against the Obama administration at one point in that case, saying it could not claim executive privilege to withhold some of the documents.
Jackson, a former Trout Cacheris litigation partner in Washington, was confirmed in 2011. She graduated in 1979 from Harvard Law School, where one of her classmates included Chief Justice John Roberts. She also served as a law clerk to Judge Harrison Winter of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and as an assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia before going into private practice.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readWill Khan Resign? FTC Chair Isn't Saying Whether She'll Stick Around After Giving Up Gavel
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250