If a criminal figures out a more effective way to break into people's homes to steal more, should he receive a lighter sentence per dollar of what he steals? Biden's nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, certainly thinks so.
The legal system doesn't normally work that way. If a rapist rapes two women, he gets two sentences, one for each crime. Each crime a criminal gets convicted for gets a separate penalty. That has traditionally been true for child pornography, where more pictures of children mean crimes have been committed.
In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, Jackson discussed concerns raised primarily by Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) that she was lenient on people who had child pornography. Hawley pointed out that as a judge, there were seven cases where she gave sentences below what was recommended by the federal sentencing guidelines. As a member of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, she also pushed to lower the penalties for child pornography.
“More serious child pornography offenders were based on the volume, based on the number of photographs that they received in the mail, and that made total sense before when we didn't have the internet, when we didn't have the distribution,” Jackson explained. “But the way that the guideline is now structured, based on that set of circumstances, is leading to extreme disparities in the system because it is so easy for people to get volumes of this kind of material now by computers.”
The sentencing guidelines help ensure that two criminals who commit the same crime face the same prison term. Jackson claims that a criminal getting 100 child porn pictures through the mail is less harmful than getting 100 pictures on his computer over the internet. The point of the penalties is to discourage pedophiles from getting more pictures because taking pictures harms children. The greater the demand for those pictures, the more children are harmed.
Indeed, Jackson acknowledged this in her answer: “There is only a market because there are lookers. You are contributing to child sex abuse.” But she doesn't understand where this answer logically takes her. Whether someone pays for an electronic image of child porn or has a printed copy of that picture, they increase the demand.
She claimed that she viewed the crime of child pornography as “damaging,” as “horrible.” But consistently deviating from the sentencing norm established by the guidelines for child porn doesn't match Jackson's words.
ABC News came to Jackson's defense by using Biden administration talking points to note that Senator Hawley had voted for circuit court nominees who, as district court judges, had sentenced criminals below the guidelines for child porn cases. But there is a problem with this claim. Judges will once in a long while deviate from the sentencing guidelines. Indeed, most judges have probably done it a couple or a few times out of the hundreds of cases that they have heard because there might be unusual circumstances that might auger for either stiffer or more lenient sentencing. Republican judges probably do this much less often than Democrat ones. But going through all the circuit court judges that Hawley has voted for and finding a few cases doesn't prove what ABC thinks it does.
Trump got 174 district court and 54 circuit court judges confirmed. Of all those judges, “An ABC News review of federal judges appointed and confirmed during the Trump administration found nearly a dozen had handed down below-guideline sentences in cases of defendants viewing, possessing, transporting or distributing child pornography.” Suppose that “nearly a dozen” means eleven judges – that is still just 4.8% of the judges that Trump placed on the bench. Undoubtedly, ABC provides no information on exactly the number of cases that handful of judges sentenced below the guidelines for a broad range of pornography cases. For many of that eleven, it could be just one case each.
What is clear is that Jackson is an outlier. For her to do it seven times truly distinguishes her.
Of course, no one should be surprised by Jackson's record on sentencing. Jackson was a public defender, and they tend to be very liberal. A very liberal president appointed her. Activist organizations on the left strongly support her.
The irony is that with violent crime soaring and Democrats facing backlash over cutting police funds and left-wing District Attorneys refusing to prosecute violent criminals, Democrats are just now wanting to claim that they are not soft on crime. Yet, while Biden and Democrats say one thing, they nominate and vote for a Supreme Court justice who continues their soft on crime policies.
This article originally appeared in Townhall. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.
Democrats Nominate a Soft on Crime Person for the Supreme Court
Will Trump Dump JD Vance?
ANALYSIS – Is Trump regretting his VP pick? Will Trump tell Vance he is “fired”? When former President Donald Trump selected J.D. Vance as his vice presidential candidate soon after surviving an assassination attempt, some called the choice bold and a doubling down on Trumpism.
I said he could help Trump make his case in 2024 and be the GOP standard bearer in 2028. Still, I also said I would have preferred Trump had picked a woman, and that I had some reservations about Vance as VP, including his youth and inexperience.
Fox News’ Kilmeade Fires Back At Racism Allegations
Trump’s ‘Dying Wish’ Exposed – What He Wants If Assassinated
Kamala Harris ‘Owns’ All Of Biden’s Many National Security Failures
Does This Single Fact Signal Our Imminent Financial Collapse?
Sponsored
Help Law Enforcement in Their Time of Need!If a criminal figures out a more effective way to break into people's homes to steal more, should he receive a lighter sentence per dollar of what he steals? Biden's nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, certainly thinks so.
The legal system doesn't normally work that way. If a rapist rapes two women, he gets two sentences, one for each crime. Each crime a criminal gets convicted for gets a separate penalty. That has traditionally been true for child pornography, where more pictures of children mean crimes have been committed.
In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, Jackson discussed concerns raised primarily by Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) that she was lenient on people who had child pornography. Hawley pointed out that as a judge, there were seven cases where she gave sentences below what was recommended by the federal sentencing guidelines. As a member of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, she also pushed to lower the penalties for child pornography.
“More serious child pornography offenders were based on the volume, based on the number of photographs that they received in the mail, and that made total sense before when we didn't have the internet, when we didn't have the distribution,” Jackson explained. “But the way that the guideline is now structured, based on that set of circumstances, is leading to extreme disparities in the system because it is so easy for people to get volumes of this kind of material now by computers.”
The sentencing guidelines help ensure that two criminals who commit the same crime face the same prison term. Jackson claims that a criminal getting 100 child porn pictures through the mail is less harmful than getting 100 pictures on his computer over the internet. The point of the penalties is to discourage pedophiles from getting more pictures because taking pictures harms children. The greater the demand for those pictures, the more children are harmed.
Indeed, Jackson acknowledged this in her answer: “There is only a market because there are lookers. You are contributing to child sex abuse.” But she doesn't understand where this answer logically takes her. Whether someone pays for an electronic image of child porn or has a printed copy of that picture, they increase the demand.
She claimed that she viewed the crime of child pornography as “damaging,” as “horrible.” But consistently deviating from the sentencing norm established by the guidelines for child porn doesn't match Jackson's words.
ABC News came to Jackson's defense by using Biden administration talking points to note that Senator Hawley had voted for circuit court nominees who, as district court judges, had sentenced criminals below the guidelines for child porn cases. But there is a problem with this claim. Judges will once in a long while deviate from the sentencing guidelines. Indeed, most judges have probably done it a couple or a few times out of the hundreds of cases that they have heard because there might be unusual circumstances that might auger for either stiffer or more lenient sentencing. Republican judges probably do this much less often than Democrat ones. But going through all the circuit court judges that Hawley has voted for and finding a few cases doesn't prove what ABC thinks it does.
Trump got 174 district court and 54 circuit court judges confirmed. Of all those judges, “An ABC News review of federal judges appointed and confirmed during the Trump administration found nearly a dozen had handed down below-guideline sentences in cases of defendants viewing, possessing, transporting or distributing child pornography.” Suppose that “nearly a dozen” means eleven judges – that is still just 4.8% of the judges that Trump placed on the bench. Undoubtedly, ABC provides no information on exactly the number of cases that handful of judges sentenced below the guidelines for a broad range of pornography cases. For many of that eleven, it could be just one case each.
What is clear is that Jackson is an outlier. For her to do it seven times truly distinguishes her.
Of course, no one should be surprised by Jackson's record on sentencing. Jackson was a public defender, and they tend to be very liberal. A very liberal president appointed her. Activist organizations on the left strongly support her.
The irony is that with violent crime soaring and Democrats facing backlash over cutting police funds and left-wing District Attorneys refusing to prosecute violent criminals, Democrats are just now wanting to claim that they are not soft on crime. Yet, while Biden and Democrats say one thing, they nominate and vote for a Supreme Court justice who continues their soft on crime policies.
This article originally appeared in Townhall. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.
Sponsored
Help Law Enforcement in Their Time of Need!John Lott
Will Trump Dump JD Vance?
Search
follow us
subscribe
Trending Stories
Will Trump Dump JD Vance?
ANALYSIS – Is Trump regretting his VP pick? WillBacklash Grows As Harley-Davidson Infected With Woke Virus
ANALYSIS – Say it isn’t so! Even asProject 2025 Will Return Sanity To Our Woke Military
ANALYSIS – “I disagree with some of the thingsNew Impeachment Investigation Launched Into Allegations Hunter Biden Invoked Joe’s Name
Congressional investigators are looking into further allegations againstCommentary
Will Trump Dump JD Vance?
Kamala Harris ‘Owns’ All Of Biden’s Many National Security Failures
Does This Single Fact Signal Our Imminent Financial Collapse?
Smoke Shop Shooting: 71-Year-Old Stops Armed Burglar
Security
Trump’s ‘Dying Wish’ Exposed – What He Wants If Assassinated
Kamala Harris ‘Owns’ All Of Biden’s Many National Security Failures
US Support For Israel In Its War Must Be ‘Ironclad’
US Fighters Intercept Chinese And Russian Bombers Near Alaska
Foreign Affairs
Trump’s ‘Dying Wish’ Exposed – What He Wants If Assassinated
Attacks Disrupt Paris: Major Infrastructure Targeted Hours Before Olympic Games
US Fighters Intercept Chinese And Russian Bombers Near Alaska
Disruptions Linger After IT Update Crashes Computer Systems Worldwide
Business & economics
Does This Single Fact Signal Our Imminent Financial Collapse?
Elon’s ‘Final Straw’ To Cost California Millions
Meet The Man Who Tracks Pelosi’s Investments – Guess His Earnings Last Month?
Congress Investigating Whether Woke Activists Broke Federal Tax Law With ESG Investment Schemes
heath & science
Old School Sold For Next To Nothing To Planned Parenthood
Elon Musk On Estranged Child: ‘Killed By The Woke Mind Virus’
Congressman Claims Biden Didn’t Recognize Him Despite Their Friendship
Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee Succumbs To Pancreatic Cancer
American Liberty Arms
Trump Shooter Put in Range Time Weeks Before Assassination Attempt
Armed Georgia Man And A Labradoodle Capture Inmate
More Anti-Gun Groups Fabricating Mass Shooting Data
The Truck Gun For Active Killer Interdiction: Realistic?
At American Liberty News, we eschew the mainstream media’s tightly controlled narrative to provide our readers with real news, real insights, and the means to take action. We seek out insightful coverage – and partner with knowledgeable and experienced people and organizations to bring you the information and insight our readers demand.
We humbly seek to provide the tools and information necessary for our readers to decide for themselves what is true and what is right.
TOP TAGS
TOP CATEGORIES
FEATURES
American Liberty News ©2022
Evolution Digital Media | 1900 Reston Metro Plz | Suite 600 | Reston, VA 20190