Welp, ThisIt’s now even more interesting. These are the best being Joe Biden’s nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the United States Supreme Court. Specifically, Jackson’s “long history” of letting pedophiles “off the hook.”
As reported by Fox News, Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley on Wednesday posted a troubling Twitter thread containing multiple examples demonstrating Jackson’s “alarming” pattern of lenient treatment of sex offenders convicted of preying on children. Hawley stated in one tweet that Jackson had been advocating for child sex offender leniency since her time at law school.
Jackson, as both a judge as well as as policymaker, has shown a tendency to let child porn offenders go free from the law for their horrendous crimes. She’s been advocating for it since law school. This goes beyond ‘soft on crime.’ I’m concerned that this a record that endangers our children.
The first and most obvious question is if Josh Hawley’s office could gain access to Jackson’s troubling records, could not the Biden White House have done the same?
The second most obvious question, assuming the answer to the first question is “yes,” is if Team Biden did see the same information on Jackson’s background (of course they saw it) then why in the hell was this woman nominated? The question is rhetorical, of course; we know damn well why she was Biden’s pick.
As a policymaker and judge, Judge Jackson is known for letting child porn offenders get away with their horrific crimes. She’s been advocating for it since law school. This goes beyond “soft on crime.” I’m concerned that this a record that endangers our children
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) March 16, 2022
In another tweet, Hawley cited an excerpt from one of Jackson’s law school writings in which she argued sex offender status can lead to “stigmatization and ostracism” and that public policy is driven by a “climate of fear, hatred, and revenge” against sex offenders.
In the current climate of fear, hatred, and revenge associated with the release of convicted sex offenders, courts must be especially attentive to legislative enactments that “use[ ]To justify detention and punishment, public safety and health rhetoric is used.
Get off the bus. You should stop taking the bus. Yes, indeed!The defense of public safety and health requires the recourse to punishment. Child sex crime recidivism rates alone make a mockery of Jackson’s argument. She worries about the stigmatism, ostracism, and other negative effects of the most vile criminals on this planet.
As far back as her time in law school, Judge Jackson has questioned making convicts register as sex offenders – saying it leads to “stigmatization and ostracism.” She’s suggested public policy is driven by a “climate of fear, hatred & revenge” against sex offenders pic.twitter.com/2QUcPOnWPR
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) March 16, 2022
“It gets worse,” Hawley wrote — and this is disgusting:
This is just the beginning. It gets worse. Sentencing Commission. Judge Jackson argued for drastic reforms in the treatment of sex offenders under law. Eliminating the mandatory minimum sentence for child porn.
Raise your hands — how many think Jackson advocated for the elimination of a mandatory minimum sentence for child porn so liberal activist judges would have the option of imposing zero sentences?
This is just the beginning. It gets worse. As a member of the U.S. Sentenncing Commission Judge Jackson advocated drastic changes in the law regarding sex offenders, including the elimination or modification to the mandatory minimum sentences for child porn.
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) March 16, 2022
As noted by Fox, Hawley explained that during a February 2012 Sentencing Commission hearing, Jackson suggested to a witness that some child pornography offenders were “less serious offenders” because they engaged in child pornography due to motivations that weren’t sexual but rather an attempt to be part of a group.
It is crazy. I don’t want to bust out the infamous Hillaryism, here, but what the hell difference does it make Why?Deviant tries to look at child naked photos without realizing that it is a crime. He/she continues looking at pictures of naked children.? Why do I have a not-all-that-sneaking feeling that Jackson would also push for the application of the same twisted “logic” on criminals convicted of other serious crimes?
Hawley tweeted multiple examples of Jackson’s pattern, all of which were disturbing. Here are some:
If the following applies to you: United States v. HawkinsThe sex offenders had many images of child porn. His age was more than 18. He was over 18. Judge Jackson sentenced him to just 3 months prison. Three months.
United States v. StewartThe criminal had thousands of images of child porn. He also planned to cross state borders to abduct a nine-year-old girl. Guidelines recommended a sentence between 97 and 121 months. Jackson sentenced him to a mere 57-month term.
United States v. CooperGuidelines called for sentences of between 151 to 188 months. Judge Jackson settled for 60 months. It was the minimum sentence permitted by law.
United States v. DownsThe perp sent multiple photos to an anonymous instant messaging platform, one of which included an image of a child younger than 5. Guidelines suggested a range of 70 to 87 months. He was sentenced to the lowest possible term of imprisonment by Judge Jackson, which is 60 months
United States v. SearsThe sex offenders distributed over 102 porn videos to children. Also, he sent porn pictures to his 10-year old daughter. Guidelines recommend 97-121 years in prison. Judge Jackson granted him 71 months.
Hawley spoke at the bottom of the thread. human being — irrespective of politics — reading this article should be thinking if not screaming out loud:
It is an alarming record, especially for a judge nominated to be the highest court of the country. Protecting the most vulnerable shouldn’t be up for debate. Sending child predators to jail shouldn’t be controversial.
It should. They should be kept in prisonBased on minimal sentencing requirements and left-wing activist judge judges.
It is an alarming record, especially for a judge nominated to be the highest court of the country. Protecting the most vulnerable shouldn’t be up for debate. Sending child predators to jail shouldn’t be controversial.
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) March 16, 2022
Yet Joe Biden and his handlers either: a) missed “all of the above” (not a chance); or, b) didn’t give a damn after reading about every one of these cases and more.
After all, there were only two priority boxes to check in determining Joe’s selection. Ketanji Jackson Brown checked both. All flying with flying colors.
Interesting, isn’t it, how the “Party of the Children” seems to favor everyone but?
RedState Related
Biden Supreme Court Nominee Decisions Reversed for ‘Judicial Overreach’ and Other Troubling Facts
BREAKING NEWS: Biden Names Supreme Court Pick and Lindsey Graham is Mad
About Post Author
