in World News

Democrats And Media Enablers Are Overlooking Child Sex Crimes To Protect Ketanji Brown Jackson

In every single child pornography case handled by Judge Jackson, she went below the maximum recommendation, below the minimum recommendation, and below the prosecutor’s request.

In the week since Biden Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson was questioned about her pattern of reduced sentencing in grisly child pornography cases, two narratives have developed.

The first view holds that the question of sentencing, and the implication that Judge Jackson is soft on child pornography offenders, is “disingenuous,”  “a smear,” and “meritless to the point of demagoguery.” According to this narrative, such claims distort the rate at which judges routinely depart from the sentencing guidelines and do not distinguish the harm between the production of child pornography and mere possession of it.

This view also seems to imply that most child pornography cases involve the unjust sentencing of 17-year-olds turning 18, when their otherwise mildly voyeuristic behavior suddenly turns criminal. It’s an argument that, bizarrely, also relies on the Washington Post’s vilification artist, Glenn Kessler, to justify a flippant dismissal of the concerns raised.

In a recent podcast, National Review’s Charlie Cooke claimed Republicans did not acquit themselves well for focusing on the topic. National Review’s editor, Rich Lowry, said the “child porn thing” was “demagogic,” and should not have even been raised. Columnist Brad Polumbo implied Republican senators asking detailed questions about Judge Jackson’s sentencing record were “grandstanding.”

full story at

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,