Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Judge says she may impose gag order on Roger Stone

Judge Amy Berman Jackson said she was considering limiting Stone from speaking publicly about the case.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Andrew Prokop
Andrew Prokop is a senior politics correspondent at Vox, covering the White House, elections, and political scandals and investigations. He’s worked at Vox since the site’s launch in 2014, and before that, he worked as a research assistant at the New Yorker’s Washington, DC, bureau.

Since his indictment by special counsel Robert Mueller last week, Roger Stone has been omnipresent in the media, proclaiming his innocence and decrying the circumstances of his arrest.

But he may not have much longer to do so. Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who will oversee Stone’s case in US District Court, suggested she was considering imposing a gag order — which would limit Stone’s ability to speak publicly about the case outside of court.

Jackson made the statements at her first status conference for the Stone case Friday afternoon. She remarked that the case had already amassed a great deal of public attention, “fueled in large part by extrajudicial statements of the defendant himself.” But, she said, “this is a criminal proceeding, not a public relations campaign.”

She said she respected Stone’s First Amendment rights to free speech — but said he had also decided to exercise his right to a fair trial, that it’s her responsibility to make that happen, and that treating pretrial publicity “like a book tour” could impede that by making it harder to seat an impartial jury.

Jackson stressed that any such order would apply to all parties in the case, not just Stone. (She imposed a similar order after Paul Manafort was indicted in Washington, DC, in late 2017.) She also said the order would only apply to public statements “that could have prejudicial impact on this case” — and said Stone would remain free to opine publicly on other topics, from foreign relations to “Tom Brady.”

The judge said she would offer both sides the opportunity to offer their views on such an order in writing, before makes up her mind. Those filings are due on Friday of next week.

Mueller has indicted Stone on seven counts of obstruction of justice, making false statements, and witness tampering. The charges allege that Stone attempted to obstruct congressional investigations into Russian interference with the 2016 election. Mueller says Stone did this by withholding evidence, lying, and by pressuring a witness not to testify about potential links between Stone and WikiLeaks.

Stone has insisted in television and radio interviews, as well as on his Instagram feed, that he is innocent and being “framed” by Mueller.


For more on the Mueller probe, follow Andrew Prokop on Twitter and check out Vox’s guide to the Trump-Russia investigation.

More in Politics

The Logoff
Trump’s DOJ wants to undo January 6 convictionsTrump’s DOJ wants to undo January 6 convictions
The Logoff

How the Trump administration is still trying to rewrite January 6 history.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Donald Trump messed with the wrong popeDonald Trump messed with the wrong pope
Politics

Trump fought with Pope Francis before. He’s finding Pope Leo XIV to be a tougher foil.

By Christian Paz
Podcasts
A cautionary tale about tax cutsA cautionary tale about tax cuts
Podcast
Podcasts

California cut property taxes in the 1970s. It didn’t go so well.

By Miles Bryan and Noel King
Podcasts
Obama’s top Iran negotiator on Trump’s screwupsObama’s top Iran negotiator on Trump’s screwups
Podcast
Podcasts

Wendy Sherman helped Obama reach a deal with Iran. Here’s what she thinks Trump is doing wrong.

By Kelli Wessinger and Noel King
Politics
The Supreme Court could legalize moonshine, and ruin everything elseThe Supreme Court could legalize moonshine, and ruin everything else
Politics

McNutt v. DOJ could allow the justices to seize tremendous power over the US economy.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
The new Hormuz blockade, briefly explainedThe new Hormuz blockade, briefly explained
The Logoff

Trump tries Iran’s playbook.

By Cameron Peters