Kentanji Brown Jackson’s anti-constitutional, pro-child predator views By Andrea Widburg
Today was the second day of hearings on the nomination of Kentanji Brown Jackson, a person Joe Biden nominated to the Supreme Court because she’s a leftist Black woman. It revealed that she is anti-constitutional, anti-White, and has a weird fondness for child sex predators.
Democrats’ statements today boiled down to three things: (1) We are so excited that you’re a Black female. (2) Republicans are racist for daring to inquire into your credentials and views. (3) Regarding those racist questions, we would never treat a Supreme Court nominee as disrespectfully as the Republicans are treating you. (Their disgraceful treatment of Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Comey Barrett, Clarence Thomas, and Robert Bork has been memory-holed.)
The real focus was on Jackson’s disturbing views about child sexual predators, the Constitution, and race. Her answers revealed that she’s either very dumb or very dishonest.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R. Mo.) already tweeted out last week Jackson’s history of demanding and imposing lesser sentences and other punishments for people convicted of pedophilia or child pornography. His questions focused on an 18-year-old man facing ten years in prison to whom she gave a three-month sentence. The man possessed hardcore stuff:
Videos included those showing a 12-year-old male committing a sexual act, about which Hawley said. “I’m not gonna I’m not gonna read exactly what it was,” because of the graphic nature of the content. There was another video showing an 8 year old “committing a sexual act,” and still others, showing 11-year-olds, the rape of children by adult males, and “very lengthy and include numerous images, numerous views, sometimes collages, sometimes multiple victims, you see the act and progress, the government goes on to describe some of the masochistic images,” Hawley said.
Jackson agreed that the crime was heinous but said that she wanted to “redirect[] the defendants’ attention” through punishments other than prison (limits on computer use, being kept from children, etc.). Hawley pointed out that her opinions did not give her the right to ignore Congress’s laws.
Hawley also pressed Jackson about the fact that she thought the small size of the collection, rather than its appalling contents, mattered. He also noted that Jackson seemed to feel that the defendant (18) was just curious about his “peers” (8-13-year-olds) and that she’d apologized for sentencing him. The Post Millennial has an excellent rundown of the back and forth.
What’s striking is how Jackson’s answers so often sound almost logical but they’re not. This surreal quality was especially apparent when she explained why she thought existing child pornography laws are too harsh.
Huh? The sentences before the internet made porn readily accessible were very harsh but now that porn is so easily available it’s wrong to punish people as hard as in the old days? Jackson believes that, because she disagrees with Congress, she can ignore the law. Jackson’s views about the constitution and race are also disturbing. First, she claimed that, even though she sits on the board of a pricey D.C. elementary school, she knew nothing about the way the school taught racial theories derived from Critical Race Theory and it didn’t matter to her work anyway:
Fast-Acting Stress-Relief Strategies That Work Well At Home
New York Launches New Guidelines for Cars Used Less Than 50 Miles/day
Before You Renew Amazon Prime, Read This
Here’s How Much New York Maids Charge to Clean a House in 2022
In fact, Jackson has long been an admirer of critical race theorists and claims to support the doctrines they espouse:
What does this boil down to? It means that a person seeking to be installed as a Supreme Court justice—sworn to uphold the Constitution she’s charged with interpreting—buys into an ideological theory that says the Constitution is “roach powder” and inherently racist, making the American nation rotten from root to branch. Her beliefs cannot coexist with being on the Supreme Court. It’s like trapping matter and anti-matter in the same space.
I sincerely hope that the usual suspects (Senators Romney, Collins, Murkowski, and Sasse) understand that Jackson’s open embrace of the ideas underlying CRT (even if she refuses the label) and her sympathy for child sexual predators prove conclusively that she is unfit for the Supreme Court.
Comments are closed.
