It’s quite astonishing to witness the differences in how a left-wing judge is treated compared to a more conservative judge.
On one hand you have Justice Kavanaugh, who was raked through the coals by leftist Democrats and their media cohorts. Not only was his judicial record heavily scrutinized, but Kavanaugh’s personal life from the previous 25 years was in question. It was an embarrassment on the American judicial system.
Then we have Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, a pedophile sympathizer whose record outlines a disturbing pattern of “judicial philosophy.”
Judge Brown faced her second day of questions during a Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday. She was forced to respond to scrutiny about her record of protecting child pornographers from maximum sentences.
[source: The Daily Caller]
Republican Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley drew attention to Jackson’s record on child pornography cases in a Twitter thread last week, making the issue a key line of Republican opposition to Jackson’s nomination.
“In every single child porn case for which we can find records, Judge Jackson deviated from the federal sentencing guidelines in favor of child porn offenders,” Hawley wrote.
Jackson dismissed Hawley’s claims in an exchange with Democratic Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, saying that “as a mother and a judge who has had to deal with these cases, I was thinking that nothing could be further from the truth.”
WATCH: Senator @HawleyMO asks Ketanji Brown Jackson about giving a heinous child predator a three-month prison sentence when federal guidelines suggested 10 years and federal prosecutors asked for two years. pic.twitter.com/FNsiL6oqI9
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 22, 2022
She explained that Congress determines how judges are supposed to sentence and that judges must consider various aspects of an offense to determine an appropriate punishment within those guidelines.
Isn’t that self-evident?
“The statute says, ‘calculate the guidelines,’ but also look at various aspects of this offense and impose a sentence that is ‘sufficient, but not greater than necessary to promote the purposes of punishment,’” Jackson said.
She also emphasized the importance of gathering victims’ perspectives to inform sentencing decisions.
“For every defendant who comes before me and who suggests, as they often do, that they’re just a looker, that these crimes don’t really matter, they’ve collected these things on the internet and it’s fine, I tell them about the victim statements that have come in to me as a judge,” Jackson said. “I tell them about the adults, who were former child sex abuse victims, who tell me that they will never have a normal adult relationship because of this abuse.”
So then why doesn’t she sentence them properly?
Really makes you think…
Author: Monica Hedren