We all know that Supreme Court nomination battles are incredibly divisive, with both sides fighting tooth and nail to either protect or attack the nominee. Unfortunately, we’ve seen some shameful attacks on nominees such as Brett Kavanaugh. His life was nearly destroyed by unproven, unsubstantiated, decades-old allegations that were given far more attention than they deserved, just because Democrats wanted to delay his confirmation until after the midterm elections when they thought that they might retake the majority in the Senate. Later, Amy Coney Barrett would receive unanimous opposition from Senate Democrats solely because of her judicial philosophy and the timing of her confirmation.
Yet now, as the confirmation hearings for Ketanji Brown Jackson begin this week, the media seems intent on dismissing valid questions about her record and covering for her troubling positions that should transcend partisan loyalty.
For example, ABC News attempted to “fact check” Sen. Josh Hawley’s (R-Mo.) statements about Jackson’s record of lenient sentences for child porn offenders.
“In every single child porn case for which we can find records, Judge Jackson deviated from the federal sentencing guidelines in favor of child porn offenders,” Hawley tweeted last week.
In their fact check, ABC News claimed Hawley’s tweet “lacked context” and that Jackson’s attitude on child porn cases was “mainstream.”
“While court records show that Jackson did impose lighter sentences than federal guidelines suggested, Hawley’s insinuation neglects critical context, including the fact that the senator himself has voted to confirm at least three federal judges who also engaged in the same practice,” claimed ABC News.
Other networks hit Hawley over what they claimed were “misleading attacks,” including the Washington Post and CNN, yet all clearly show that Hawley’s facts were correct.
The only trend I see is all of these “fact checks” admit @HawleyMO is technically correct but then argue that sentencing guidelines for pedophiles are too harsh and they should be more lenient. Gross. https://t.co/HOsMsMg0Yy pic.twitter.com/exQvGTWN9j
— Abigail Marone 🇺🇸 (@abigailmarone) March 19, 2022
Is this the issue the media thinks is the hill to die on? I get it; Democrats will defend her blindly, but really, does the media think they can honestly say that her lenient attitude toward child porn offenders is mainstream?
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), for one, dismisses these talking points as whataboutism.
“The White House’s whataboutist response to Judge Jackson’s very real record in child pornography cases is dismissive, dangerous, and offensive,” he tweeted. “We need real answers.”
Others agreed.
“Judge Jackson’s pattern and practice of leniency on sentencing for child sex crimes is deeply troubling. Her record of special empathy towards criminals is the fulfillment of Democrats’ soft-on-crime, defund the police movement that has caused a spike in crime across the nation,” Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) said in a statement.
Mike Davis, founder and president of the Article III Project, also finds Jackson’s record on this issue troubling.
“It just keeps getting worse. It’s now clear why the Biden administration does not want this side of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s history to get out. Jackson’s record shielding child predators from the punishment and justice they deserve should trouble every sane person,” Davis said in a statement. “Judge Jackson went to bat for those who prey on the most vulnerable members of society. Judge Jackson must explain herself at her upcoming hearing. If she fails to adequately justify her disturbing record, every senator who votes for her must be held accountable.”
The American people are entitled to hear Jackson answer questions about this issue, to determine for themselves whether she is mainstream or not. The media wants the public to believe that Republicans are out of line for asking these questions, but in reality, they’ve proven that they’re afraid of the answers.