The Trailer: How campaign rhetoric about child porn made it to the Supreme Court hearing

Source: washingtonpost.com 3/22/22

In this edition: Why Republicans are talking about pedophilia this week, how contempt is shaping Ohio’s U.S. Senate primary, and what’s happening in the race to replace Don Young.

Treat a senator: Print out your favorite part of the newsletter and turn it into a big, scary poster. This is The Trailer.

The White House dismissed it with a joke. A National Review columnist called it a “smear.” And the paid media campaigns against Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination to the Supreme Court have ignored it completely.

And yet, on Tuesday morning, the first accusation Jackson was asked to respond to was the one first made by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) — that she had given sexual predators and people caught with child pornography the most “lenient” sentences she possibly could.

Read the full article

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A thinking Judge or Justice is a person needed on the bench. Sen Graham’s outburst is just as bad as previous societies throwing the baby out with the bathwater to the gulag because they can regardless.

“This is a 25-year pet project for Judge Jackson, and it is very, very alarming,” Mike Davis, the founder of the conservative Article III Project, said on a conservative podcast shortly before the hearing. “Of all the issues that she could have taken on in law school, as a sentencing commissioner where she’s setting policy, as a district court judge — why is going easier on people who possess child pornography one of her pet issues?” 

Article III Project is a non-profit that promotes “constitutionalist judges.” “Constitutionalism,” apparently, doesn’t mean keeping the government from monitoring Internet speech.

I’m starting to worry about how obsessed these GOP Senators are with CP and other sexual offenses. 😒
It’s gone beyond hysterical hyperbole to outright creepy obsession. 🤔
Maybe someone needs to check THEIR computers. 😏

Last edited 2 years ago by David⚜️

My first reaction when Sen. Hawley incredulously inquired of the Judge whether or not she agreed that sex offenders are mistreated by society and castigated unnecessarily (this is a paraphrase), was that this was THE opportunity for this judge to scream at the top of her lungs (as I would have) “YES!! Isn’t it OBVIOUS??”. But after the judge replied in a very controlled and neutral fashion, diffusing the Senator’s attack, I agreed that this was not the forum nor the time to make such arguments/statements. In retrospect, this a far wiser approach. The judge’s job at this point, and in this forum, was to “not alienate the majority of Senators” and present herself as poised, intelligent, honest, and truthful, and holding the judicial temperament necessary for the position of Supreme Court Justice. This is how she has comported herself throughout these hearings. She has done an excellent job.

The correct time and place to voice her opinion as to the mistreatment and overly harsh penalties attached to sex offender laws, regulations, conditions, registrations, etc. is when she has become a Sup. Ct. Associate Justice and has a seat at the conference table where these matters can be properly debated. I don’t know if she will be able to persuade the majority of justices to agree with her, but I am hopeful.

those commie basters really suck no class all hate

I was impressed with Judge Jackson’s poise, maturity, and temperament in the face of Rightwing Extremist Senators (Cruz, Hawley, Cotton, Graham, Blackburn, and others) racist and overly-rude questioning. I know that I would never have been able to comport myself similarly.

When questioned yesterday by Sen. Josh Hawley as to whether or not she agreed or disagreed with the proposition that sex offenders were treated unfairly and overly-harsh by society (my paraphrase), I was so hoping that she would stand up and shout “YES!! Isn’t it OBVIOUS??” But in retrospect, I realized that the judge’s job was not to take Hawley’s bait (which likely would have resulted in her alienating not only the senators but the public as well by appearing “emotional” or acting as an advocate for one side or another), but rather to showcase her intellect, ability to analyze complex legal issues, and remain composed and in control when under attack. She did an excellent job.

The time for her to advocate any position is (once officially appointed as a Sup. Ct. Associate Justice) is at the conference table with her fellow justices. Let us pray for her success.