Bridget Anne Kelly
| Bridget Anne Kelly | |
|---|---|
| Born: | 1972 New Jersey |
| Charges: | |
| Sentence: | Originally 13 months (vacated) |
| Facility: | N/A |
| Status: | Conviction vacated (May 2020) |
Bridget Anne Kelly is an American former political operative who served as Deputy Chief of Staff to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie. In 2017, she was convicted for her role in the "Bridgegate" scandal—the politically motivated closure of access lanes to the George Washington Bridge in September 2013. However, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously vacated her conviction in May 2020, ruling that while her conduct was corrupt and an abuse of power, it did not constitute federal fraud.
Early Career
Bridget Anne Kelly built her career in New Jersey Republican politics through a series of progressively responsible positions in state and local government. Before joining the Christie administration, she worked in various communications and political roles that demonstrated her competence and loyalty to Republican causes in the state.
Kelly joined Christie's gubernatorial team and quickly proved herself as an effective political operative and administrator. Her rise through the ranks was rapid, and by 2013 she had attained the position of Deputy Chief of Staff to the Governor—one of the most powerful positions in the administration. In this role, she served as a key gatekeeper to Christie, managed critical relationships with local officials across the state, and was deeply involved in the political strategy surrounding Christie's 2013 reelection campaign. Her position made her a central figure in the administration's efforts to secure endorsements from Democratic mayors as part of Christie's bipartisan appeal strategy.
The Bridgegate Scandal
Background
In 2013, Chris Christie was seeking reelection as Governor of New Jersey with ambitions extending far beyond state office. Christie was positioning himself for a 2016 presidential run, and his team developed a deliberate strategy to secure endorsements from Democratic mayors across the state. The goal was to demonstrate Christie's ability to work across party lines and build coalitions—a crucial selling point for a Republican candidate in a traditionally blue state. A landslide reelection victory with bipartisan support would position Christie as a formidable national candidate who could appeal to independents and moderate Democrats.
The Christie administration maintained detailed spreadsheets tracking which Democratic mayors had endorsed the governor and which had not. Endorsements were pursued aggressively, with meetings arranged and political incentives offered. Mark Sokolich, the Democratic mayor of Fort Lee, New Jersey, was among those courted for an endorsement. Fort Lee sits at the New Jersey end of the George Washington Bridge, one of the world's busiest bridges connecting New Jersey to New York City and a critical transportation artery for the region. Despite the administration's outreach, Sokolich declined to endorse Christie for reelection—a decision that would have devastating consequences for his town.
The Lane Closures
On August 13, 2013, Kelly sent a now-infamous email to David Wildstein, a Christie ally at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey: "Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee."
On September 9, 2013—the first day of school—the Port Authority closed two of the three local access lanes from Fort Lee to the George Washington Bridge. The closures were implemented without notice to Fort Lee officials or the public.
The result was massive traffic gridlock in Fort Lee that lasted four days. The traffic backup:
- Delayed emergency responders
- Trapped school buses with children
- Caused hours-long commutes for residents
- Created significant public safety hazards
Port Authority officials initially claimed the closures were for a "traffic study," but this explanation was later revealed to be false.
The Cover-Up
When questions arose about the lane closures, Christie administration officials and Port Authority allies worked to maintain the fiction that the closures were a legitimate traffic study examining local versus express lane usage patterns. Port Authority officials provided this explanation to Fort Lee officials and the media, even as the closures continued to cause chaos.
Internal communications later revealed there was no actual traffic study—no data was collected, no methodology was established, and no analysis was performed. The "traffic study" explanation was fabricated to provide bureaucratic cover for what was, in reality, political retaliation against Mayor Sokolich for refusing to endorse Christie. As media scrutiny intensified in late 2013, Kelly and other Christie administration officials continued to coordinate responses designed to distance the governor from the closures and maintain plausible deniability. The cover-up succeeded for months until documentary evidence emerged that definitively proved the political motivation behind the scheme.
Scandal Erupts
In January 2014, Kelly's "time for some traffic problems" email became public through a document release, exposing the political motivation behind the closures. The scandal dominated national news and severely damaged Christie's reputation as he was considered a leading candidate for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.
Criminal Prosecution
Federal Charges
In May 2015, a federal grand jury indicted Bridget Anne Kelly and Bill Baroni, a former Port Authority deputy executive director, on charges of:
- Conspiracy to commit wire fraud
- Wire fraud
- Conspiracy to deprive Fort Lee residents of their civil rights
- Misapplication of property of an organization receiving federal benefits
David Wildstein, who had carried out the lane closures, pleaded guilty and cooperated with prosecutors.
Trial and Conviction
Kelly and Baroni were tried together in federal court in Newark in fall 2016. Both were convicted on all counts on November 4, 2016.
At trial, prosecutors argued that Kelly and Baroni had used their positions to misappropriate Port Authority property (the bridge lanes) and defraud the public of their right to honest services from government officials.
Sentencing
In March 2017, U.S. District Judge Susan Wigenton sentenced Kelly to 13 months in federal prison, followed by supervised release. Baroni received 18 months.
Kelly tearfully testified at sentencing, expressing remorse while also suggesting she was being made a scapegoat for more powerful figures who escaped accountability.
Appeals
Third Circuit Appeal
Kelly and Baroni appealed their convictions to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, arguing that the federal fraud statutes did not apply to their conduct because they had not sought to obtain money or property for themselves. They contended that the prosecution was an improper federalization of local political misconduct that, while potentially unethical, did not constitute federal crimes.
In November 2018, the Third Circuit upheld the convictions in a divided decision. The majority ruled that the defendants had committed fraud by deceiving the Port Authority and the public about the true purpose of the lane closures. The court found that the defendants had commandeered Port Authority resources—including the bridge lanes, personnel time, and operational capacity—for political purposes, which constituted a taking of property under federal fraud law. A dissenting judge argued that the majority's interpretation of the fraud statutes was overly broad and could criminalize routine political conduct. The Third Circuit's decision set up the eventual Supreme Court showdown over the proper scope of federal fraud prosecution.
Supreme Court
Kelly and Baroni petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case. The case, styled Kelly v. United States, was argued in January 2020.
Supreme Court Decision
On May 7, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously vacated the convictions of both Kelly and Baroni in a decision written by Justice Elena Kagan.
The Ruling
The Court found that while Kelly's conduct was "an abuse of power" and "corrupt," it did not meet the legal requirements for federal fraud:
Key Legal Points
The Court's reasoning centered on several points:
- The federal fraud statutes require defendants to have sought "money or property"
- Regulatory decisions about how to allocate government resources (like bridge lanes) do not constitute "property" under fraud law
- The lane closure was an exercise of regulatory power, however corrupt, not a theft of property
- The government failed to identify any money or property that was the object of the scheme
Impact
The decision represented a significant limitation on federal prosecutors' ability to use fraud statutes against state and local officials whose corruption does not involve actual theft or personal financial gain.
Aftermath
No Prison Time
Because the Supreme Court vacated her conviction before she began serving her sentence, Kelly never went to federal prison. Her conviction was dismissed with prejudice, meaning she cannot be recharged for the same conduct.
Public Response
The Supreme Court's decision provoked strong reactions across the political spectrum and among legal commentators. Many observers noted the profound irony that conduct everyone agreed was corrupt, abusive, and potentially dangerous—traffic gridlock that delayed emergency responders and endangered public safety—went unpunished because of narrow technical requirements in federal fraud law.
Legal scholars debated whether the decision represented proper judicial restraint or exposed a troubling gap in federal criminal law. Supporters of the ruling argued that the Court correctly prevented prosecutorial overreach and the federalization of every instance of local political misconduct. Critics contended that the decision created a roadmap for corrupt officials to abuse their positions as long as they don't personally profit financially. Fort Lee residents and Mayor Sokolich expressed frustration that the perpetrators of the scheme faced no criminal accountability despite the harm inflicted on their community. The decision also reignited debates about whether federal fraud statutes should be reformed to more explicitly cover public corruption cases.
Chris Christie
Governor Christie was never charged in connection with Bridgegate, despite being the ultimate beneficiary of the scheme and the center of the endorsement strategy that motivated it. Federal prosecutors apparently concluded they lacked sufficient evidence to prove Christie's direct involvement in ordering or approving the lane closures, even as multiple aides and allies faced criminal charges.
The scandal effectively ended Christie's 2016 presidential aspirations. What had been positioned as a strength—his tough, no-nonsense leadership style—became reframed as bullying and vindictiveness. Christie's poll numbers plummeted, and while he did enter the 2016 Republican primary race, he never recovered politically from Bridgegate. He withdrew after a poor showing in New Hampshire and eventually endorsed Donald Trump. Christie has consistently denied knowledge of the lane closure scheme, claiming he was betrayed by subordinates who acted without his authorization. However, David Wildstein testified at trial that Christie was informed about the closures while they were occurring and appeared pleased about them. Christie fired Kelly and other implicated staff members in January 2014 after the scandal broke, positioning himself as a victim of staff misconduct rather than a participant in the scheme.
David Wildstein
David Wildstein, the Christie ally at the Port Authority who received Kelly's "time for some traffic problems" email and directly implemented the lane closures, became the government's star witness. After initially invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination before a state legislative committee investigating Bridgegate, Wildstein eventually pleaded guilty to federal conspiracy charges in May 2015 and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors.
Wildstein's testimony at trial was devastating to Kelly and Baroni. He provided detailed accounts of the planning, execution, and cover-up of the lane closures, including testimony that Governor Christie was made aware of the closures while they were occurring. In exchange for his cooperation, Wildstein received probation rather than prison time when he was sentenced in July 2017. The Supreme Court's ruling effectively meant that Wildstein's cooperation—which required him to testify against his former colleagues and expose the inner workings of the Christie administration—was in service of a prosecution that was ultimately deemed legally insufficient under federal fraud statutes. Wildstein's guilty plea, however, was not vacated, as he had not appealed his conviction.
Legacy
The Bridgegate case had significant implications:
Political Impact
- Destroyed Christie's presidential aspirations
- Became shorthand for petty political retaliation
- Raised questions about accountability in the Christie administration
Legal Impact
- Limited the scope of federal fraud statutes
- Made it harder to prosecute state and local corruption that doesn't involve monetary theft
- Raised questions about gaps in federal criminal law
Kelly's Situation
While legally vindicated by the Supreme Court, Kelly's career in politics and public service was effectively destroyed by Bridgegate. She became the most visible face of the scandal, with her "time for some traffic problems" email becoming one of the most famous pieces of incriminating evidence in modern American political history. The email was endlessly quoted, mocked, and dissected as a symbol of petty political vindictiveness.
Kelly maintained throughout the ordeal that she was made a scapegoat for a broader culture of political retribution in the Christie administration, and that more powerful figures who directed or benefited from the scheme escaped accountability while she faced criminal prosecution. Even after the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that her conduct, however wrong and corrupt, was not criminal fraud, the damage to her reputation and career prospects was irreversible. She became synonymous with a scandal that brought down a presidential hopeful, and the legal victory could not restore what she lost professionally and personally during the years of investigation, prosecution, and appeals. The case left Kelly in a unique position—legally exonerated at the highest level, yet permanently marked by conduct that the Supreme Court explicitly described as an abuse of power.
See Also
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What was Bridgegate?
Bridgegate was a 2013 scandal in which aides to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie ordered politically motivated lane closures on the George Washington Bridge, causing massive traffic gridlock in Fort Lee as retaliation against the town's mayor for not endorsing Christie.
Q: Did Bridget Anne Kelly go to prison?
No. Although Kelly was initially sentenced to 13 months in prison, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously vacated her conviction in May 2020 before she began serving her sentence.
Q: Why did the Supreme Court overturn the Bridgegate convictions?
The Supreme Court ruled that while Kelly's conduct was corrupt and an abuse of power, it did not constitute federal fraud because the scheme did not seek to obtain money or property—the bridge lanes were a regulatory resource, not property under fraud law.
Q: What was the famous Bridgegate email?
Kelly sent an email to a Port Authority official saying "Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee," which ordered the politically motivated lane closures that caused the scandal.
Q: Was Chris Christie charged in Bridgegate?
No, Governor Christie was never charged. He denied knowledge of the scheme, though testimony suggested he was informed about the closures while they were happening.
References