Dick Durbin Dabbles in Absurdity as KBJ Gives Sketchy Response to Pedophile Sentencing Questions – Opinion

There is very little suspense on Capitol Hill regarding Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation to the Supreme Court. It was clear that Justice Stephen Breyer’s retirement would be announced, and it was likely that Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson would receive the necessary votes, with possibly several Republicans supporting him.

KBJ’s confirmation hearing hasn’t changed that dynamic. RedState has reported that she received fair and tough questions from GOP members of Judiciary Committee. Most contentious were those about her sentencing for child pornography pedophiles. The seven casesShe handled the case and gave sentences that were below the federal guidelines, sometimes far below. Senator Josh Hawley led the charge for exposing this reality and challenging it.

The second day began on Tuesday morning. Onlookers were greeted with Sen. Dick Durbin’s absurdities regarding the treatment of KBJ.

I’m just glad to see we are now at the “any questioning of absolutely anything regarding KBJ’s record is immoral” stage of this farce. It is truly mind-blowing to see the same people who questioned Amy Coney Barrett’s religion and accused Brett Kavanaugh of gang rape suddenly clutch their pearls over the treatment of a Supreme Court nominee. It is likely that me calling it absurd, in retrospect, was far too generous. Perhaps I should choose inane or asinine, absurd, ridiculous, or farcical?

While the hearing goes on as usual, however, it is already beginning to get interesting. KBJ was able to respond directly on the charges against her for leniently sentencing pedophiles. However, her response was not very clear.

The argument she’s making is that because child pornography was once distributed by physical mail, the volume possessed had more of a correlation to the seriousness of the offender. KBJ also argues that sentencing guidelines may be outdated due to distribution via the internet. This is a very skeptical argument.

It is much easier now to access and distribute child pornography online than via the US Postal Service. However, even though it is much easier to obtain and distribute child pornography online than via the US Postal Service, the amount of material a person still has on their computer shows the severity of their crime. If someone only has 12 child pornography photos, it is not the same as if they have thousands. Law enforcement is able to determine how much child pornography was actually exported via the internet.

Still, even past the particulars, I find KBJ’s argument less than convincing. Does murder seem to be a lesser crime than before the invention of firearms? After all, it’s a lot easier to pull a trigger on a gun than to wrestle with someone and stab them to death. Technology has made the crime easier, but it’s still crime. Past that, I’m not sure I care much for the level of possession and distribution in cases like this. Of all the crimes to go easy on, child pornography doesn’t seem like one that warrants leniency.

That begs the question: Why did KBJ do exactly what she did in these cases? The answer is that she likely holds the typical left-wing view that it is up to judges and district attorneys to “reform” the criminal justice system by limiting imprisonment. It’d be a lot easier on everyone if she’d just admit that and move on. As I said, she’s getting confirmed regardless.

About Post Author

Follow Us