Hon. Raymond A. Jackson See Rating Details
District Judge See Comments
Average Rating:7.1 - 7 rating(s)
Please send me alerts on this judge
E-mail Address:

Add your own rating

E-Mail Address (will not be displayed)
Confirm E-mail Address      
Add a comment only


*Temperament:   (1=Awful,10=Excellent)
*Scholarship:   (1=Awful,10=Excellent)
*Industriousness:   (1=Not at all industrious,10=Highly industrious)
*Ability to Handle Complex Litigation:    (1=Awful,10=Excellent)
*Punctuality:    (1=Chronic`y Late,10=Always on Time)
*Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation:    (1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
*Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation:   (1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Flexibility In Scheduling   (1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)
General Inclination Regarding Bail (1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases, Pre-Trial:   (1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Civil Settlement Discussions:   (1=Least Involved,10=Most Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases, Trial:    (1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases, Sentencing:    (1=Most Lenient,10=Most Harsh)
Typical Discount Off Guidelines for Cooperators:    (1=10%,10=100%)
  Items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating

Please type what you see below:


What others have said about Hon. Raymond A. Jackson


Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: 21717
In January of 2012, Judge Jackson issued a summary judgement in a case regarding the protection status of 'liking' of Facebook, saying ‘liking’ did not rise to the level of protected speech saying that Daniel Ray Carter Jr needed to have made actual statements to make such a claim. The ruling grew out of a lawsuit brought by Hampton sheriff’s deputies, one of whom claimed Carter was fired for liking the campaign page of his boss’s opponent, who said the dismissal violated his First Amendment rights in the 2011 suit. On September 18th, 2013, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond rejected Jackson's opinion that clicking the ubiquitous “thumbs up” icon was not “actual speech,” an opinion that would have had wide-ranging implications for millions of Facebook users and other new forms of expression on the web if it had stood. Facebook and the ACLU filed friend of the court briefs in the case, saying Jackson’s ruling would erode free speech rights.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 21469
He is a good judge to have if you are the defendant in a criminal case.


Comment #: 21112
The Honorable Judge Jackson definitely has a way of extracting all the required evidence before making a ruling. He uses relevant case law and takes all the time required to come to the right decision. I hope.


Comment #: 18432
Rating:Not Rated
Trying to get the 63 year old Judge Jackson to understand Facebook is like teaching my grandfather to use the computer. He is too old and out of touch with the subject to render a relevant verdict on anything involving technology. In the future hopefully he will stick to cases that he understands and is best at, and passes on contemporary technology to the younger judges in the ED.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 8469
Judge Jackson is clearly the best in the ED of Virginia. Unfailingly fair and evenhanded, he has a very clear feeling for what is the just response to a problem. We could use a half dozen with his temperament.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 7482
Judge Jackson makes a real effort to weigh both sides and give each due consideration. I would agree to try most any case before him.


Comment #: 4009
Excellent judge, we need more like him! He sees the truth for what it is, and rules accordingly.