Judge Jackson, a native Washingtonian, ruled on many high-profile cases during his 22 years on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and became known for his blunt assessments of the lawyers, jurors and defendants who came before him.
The Microsoft trial was called the most important antitrust case before a U.S. court since the Standard Oil breakup of 1911. The landmark case stretched 18 months, from 1998 to 2000, when Judge Jackson ultimately issued his ruling that Microsoft used monopolistic power to violate three antitrust provisions.
Beefy and six feet tall, Judge Jackson spoke in a deep, booming baritone and was a commanding courtroom presence. Observers noted that the judge quickly grasped the complex technical issues of the Microsoft case, but as the trial dragged on, his impatience became palpable.
Reporters noted that Judge Jackson rolled his eyes or scowled at statements by Microsoft’s attorneys and laughed during videotaped testimony by company co-founder Bill Gates. At other times during the proceedings, he appeared to yawn or nod off.
Judge Jackson issued his decision in April 2000, decreeing that Microsoft should be separated into two companies. Soon afterward, he stirred even greater controversy with a series of interviews in which he compared the computer software giant to a street gang and described Gates as “Napoleonic.”
It was rare — even unheard of — for a sitting judge to discuss his cases in such an unvarnished manner.
In reviewing Judge Jackson’s decision in 2001, a federal appeals court overturned his order that Microsoft should be broken up, but it sustained his primary ruling that the company acted as a monopoly.
But the appeals court wasn’t done. After addressing the legal issues, the judges issued a startling and sharply worded rebuke of Judge Jackson’s behavior in the case, charging him with “egregious” violations of judicial ethical standards.
More>>>