According to Real Clear Investigations' Paul Sperry, who did a deep dive into Jackson's judicial history with the U.S. Sentencing Commission as well as her rulings while serving on the D.C. Court of Appeals, she is nothing less than just another left-wing countercultural activist pretending to be someone who tries to 'fairly' adjudicate the law.
Beginning with a decision in 2011 to knock three years off the sentences of some 12,000 crack inmates who were eligible for early release because she believed the nation's drug laws were unfair to black people as well as overly harsh, Sperry also veered into Jackson's time on the federal bench in which she routinely flouted the same U.S. Sentencing Commission guidelines -- as well as requests from federal prosecutors -- in order to hand lighter-than-normal sentences to animals who prey on children.
"The Senate confirmation hearings" that took place last week "have exposed a pattern: whether as a lawyer, sentencing commissioner or judge, she has disregarded the warnings or recommendations of prosecutors and investigators while advocating or easing the punishment not just for drug dealers but also child porn offenders and even accused terrorists," Sperry wrote.
In justifying these outrages, Jackson has argued that courts and judges should show empathy for all of those who stand accused and convicted (at the expense of their victims, of course) without consideration of their offenses or behavior, and always with an eye toward rehabilitation rather than just "lock them up and throw away the key."
"Her supporters say she would bring a fresh new perspective to the high bench, which has been dominated by former prosecutors trained to keep criminals in prison, not out of it. If confirmed, Jackson would be the modern court's first public defender. No sitting justice has such experience," Sperry wrote.
"But Republicans and other critics contend her compassion has come at a price. They say she's tended to cut criminals too much slack, putting them back on the street where they can repeat their crimes — and in many cases, some of them have reoffended and found new victims, records examined by RCI reveal," he added.
And her detractors have openly fretted about how she will rule -- Constitution be darned -- in cases involving child pornographers, child sex abusers and drug cases, including those involving very dangerous behavior.
That said, the high court's conservatives will most likely continue to dominate rulings, though some of them are aging. Justice Clarence Thomas, for instance, is 73, while Justice Samuel Alito is 71; both of them are, by far, the court's proven constitutionalists. The other four right-leaning justices are younger, of course, but if something were to happen and Thomas and/or Alito were to be replaced by two more left-wing activists, at 51, Jackson will be serving with them for decades more.
The first GOP senator to bring up Jackson's horrendous record in handing out lighter sentences to child pornographers and pedophiles was Sen. Josh Hawley from Missouri.
“I’ve been researching the record of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, reading her opinions, articles, interviews & speeches. I’ve noticed an alarming pattern when it comes to Judge Jackson’s treatment of sex offenders, especially those preying on children,” he wrote in a Twitter thread the week before Jackson's confirmation hearings.
“Judge Jackson has a pattern of letting child porn offenders off the hook for their appalling crimes, both as a judge and as a policymaker. She’s been advocating for it since law school. This goes beyond ‘soft on crime.’ I’m concerned that this is a record that endangers our children,” he added.