Biden has decided on his Supreme Court pick: sources

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Jon Brown , Bill Mears | Fox News


https://i.imgur.com/TLAKPu8l.jpg

President Biden has made his decision regarding a Supreme Court nominee to replace retiring Justice Stephen Breyer, and the announcement could come as soon as Friday, two sources close to the process confirmed to Fox News.

The sources would not reveal the name, but the three finalists for the vacancy are Ketanji Brown Jackson, Leondra Kruger and Michelle Childs, Fox News has previously reported.

Justice Stephen Breyer announced he would be retiring at the end of the current term. Biden has promised to pick a Black woman, calling such a choice "long overdue."

Biden has faced criticism for limiting his Supreme Court pick to a Black woman.

Former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Dr. Ben Carson blasted Biden last month for making identity politics a factor in his choice for a Supreme Court justice.

"You know, this is America," Carson said during an interview on WMAL's "The Vince Coglianese Show," a local radio show in Washington, D.C.

"Many people fought and gave their lives to bring equality. And now we're reverting back to identity politics. And as we continue to do that, we're bringing more division into our country," Carson added.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Jessica Chasmar , Bill Mears | Fox News


https://i.imgur.com/Fc0uPFwl.jpg

President Biden is nominating Judge Kentanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, making good on a campaign promise to pick the first Black woman for the nation's highest court, sources tell Fox News.

Brown Jackson, 51, is a judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Biden will make the announcement on Friday, marking the first Supreme Court pick of his presidency after Justice Stephen Breyer, 83, announced his retirement last month.

https://i.imgur.com/VMyW5It.png

Brown Jackson has faced heightened scrutiny over a judicial record that includes high-profile rulings later overruled by higher courts.

Brown Jackson's record was a focal point last year during her confirmation for a seat on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, where she now sits.

The judge was said to be one of three candidates who was interviewed personally by Biden.

https://i.imgur.com/iqyvA50.png

The Supreme Court is now dominated 6-3 by conservatives after former President Donald Trump named three nominees.

Democrats have applauded Biden's commitment to nominate a Black woman to the nation's highest court, though some Republicans have raised objections.

Sen. Ted Cruz, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, previously told "Fox News Sunday" that Biden's promise amounted to racial discrimination.

"What the president said is that only African American women are eligible for this slot, that 94% of Americans are ineligible," Cruz said. "The way Biden ought to do it is to say 'I'm going to look for the best justice,' interview a lot of people, and if he happens to nominate a justice who was an African American woman, then great."

Biden had promised to make the pick by the end of February. The announcement comes ahead of his State of the Union address to Congress next week, as his approval ratings continue to slide, including among Democrats.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Leonardo Briceno - The Post Millennial


https://i.imgur.com/vzhSnEwl.jpg

President Joe Biden's Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson once authored an unsigned "Note" in the Harvard Law Review arguing that America's judicial system is "unfair" to sexual predators, according to findings discovered by an American Accountability Foundation investigation.

Jackson argued the unconstitutionality of certain preventative measures adopted as common practices by state governments and applied to confirmed sex offenders.

Per the Harvard Law Review article "Prevention Versus Punishment: Toward a Principled Distinction in the Restraint of Released Sex Offenders," she argued that America's judicial approaches might be unfair to sex offenders.

"This Note critiques current judicial approaches to characterizing sex offender statutes and suggests a more principled framework for making the distinction between prevention and punishment," Jackson wrote in the piece.

Jackson maintained that "even in the face of understandable public outrage over repeat sexual predators, a principled prevention/punishment analysis evaluates the effect of the challenged legislation in a manner that reinforces constitutional safeguards against unfair and unnecessarily burdensome legislative action."

State laws across the United States widely use preventative measures like offender registration with local law enforcement, DNA identification, requirements to notify neighbors and surrounding community, and others to reduce the likelihood of a second offense. These, Brown argued, aren't only preventative—they're punitive. In other words, they're used as a punishment that goes beyond a court's verdict for their specific crime; it's a "punishment" applied more generally to all sex offenders.

And that, Jackson argued, might not be constitutional.

"Although many courts and commentators herald these laws as valid regulatory measures, others reject them as punitive enactments that violate the rights of individuals who already have been sanctioned for their crimes," Jackson wrote.

"Under existing doctrine, the constitutionality of sex offender statutes depends upon their characterization as essentially 'preventive' rather than 'punitive,' yet courts have been unable to devise a consistent, coherent, and principled means of making this determination," Jackson penned.

However, her reasoning isn't one of legal precedent however—state governments have been using these practices for decades. She argued from a position that looks to protect offenders from what she described as a cultural atmosphere of hate.

"In the current climate of fear, hatred, and revenge associated with the release of convicted sex criminals, courts must be especially atten*tive to legislative enactments that use public health and safety rhetoric to justify procedures that are, in essence, punishment and detention," Jackson wrote.

Jackson acknowledged authorship of the note to a Senate Judiciary Committee, included in a list of authored works, while the senate considered her nomination to become a District Judge for the District of Columbia back in 2012.

Her written work was also confirmed by Intelligencer in a feature profiling Jackson, who the outlet says has "shown a deep interest in trying to ensure fair processes for often unpopular clients," according to the glowing Feb. 25 article.

"Once again, Joe Biden's White House has failed in the vetting process by nominating a radical Leftist like Judge Brown Jackson to the highest court in the land," AAF Founder Tom Jones said. "Americans want our judicial system to protect children and citizens from sexual predators. Judge Brown Jackson’s radical position raises questions on her suitability to serve on the court. Is she more interested in social justice engineering or administering justice?"

[PorkChopSandwiches]

#HonkHonk

[Muddy]

I have watched her some tonight. I like her. She seems very grounded.

[lost in melb.]

I thought her responses seemed genuine as well

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Kristine Parks | Fox News


https://i.imgur.com/jVEpGvil.jpg

One MSNBC commentator was so appalled by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, questioning Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson about her support for critical race theory, he claimed it was like watching the senator commit a "hate crime" against the Supreme Court nominee.

Jackson faced several questions Tuesday from Cruz about her knowledge and support of critical race theory. Jackson has previously praised New York Times' reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones’ "1619 Project" and serves on the board of trustees of an elite, private school in Washington D.C., which promotes CRT books such as Ibram X. Kendi’s "How to be an Anti-Racist."

During a break in the hearing Tuesday evening on "The Beat," political strategist and MSNBC commentator Chai Komanduri asserted that Judge Jackson was only being asked about CRT because she is a Black woman. He told MSNBC host Ari Melber, the CRT questions were about "casting her as a radical. As a Black radical who is out to get White people."

Komanduri went on to say watching Cruz question Jackson felt like witnessing a "hate crime."

"[I]t's really ugly. Quite frankly, it looked like I saw Ted Cruz commit a hate crime, in that hearing room. It was McCarthyism at its worst," he said.

He also accused the GOP of stirring up racial grievances against the Black nominee.

"He wants to gin up White grievance, him and Marsha Blackburn, the GOP want to gin up White grievance, ahead of the midterm and link Judge Jackson to that cause. It's really frankly was disgusting and ugly to watch," Komanduri added.

Fellow guest Yodit Tewolde, had high praise for Jackson, who would be the first Black woman to be on the Supreme Court if confirmed.

The criminal defense attorney and Black News Channel host agreed with her fellow guest that Jackson was "overqualified" and faced unfair treatment due to her gender and race, against "irrelevant and uninformed attacks" by "underqualified men."

After calling Jackson "basically unimpeachable," Tewolde accused the Republican senators of spreading misinformation about Jackson.

"They were misinformed, they were trying to misinform and confuse the American people, rather than honestly rallying behind one of the most qualified individuals for the high court, and instead, political posturing is what you got," she said.

[DemonGeminiX]

Ketanji Brown Jackson sexually assaulted me. I should go testify against her.

[lost in melb.]

I want Ketanji Brown Jackson to sexually assault me. I should rub my testes against her.

:ftfy:

[Muddy]

Ketanji Brown Jackson sexually assaulted me. I should go testify against her.

Sorry Bud, that only works on Republicans..

[DemonGeminiX]

Sorry Bud, that only works on Republicans..

No one believes me. It's so not fair. :sad2:

[Muddy]

No one believes me. It's so not fair. :sad2:

Fox news believes you.. :d

[lost in melb.]

I was looking through previous SCOTUS nomination screenings, just to get a bit of a sense of how controversial she is...

:whistle:



https://youtu.be/F0SwwyqhJMs

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Amanda Prestigiacomo - The Daily Wire


https://i.imgur.com/ob3j0BOl.jpg

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on Tuesday pulled out a white board to highlight Biden-picked Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson’s record on sentencing child porn offenders, which has come under fire by other Republicans, including Sen. Josh Hawley (MO).

“Ted Cruz pulls out his white board to illustrate how in child pornography cases, Ketanji Brown Jackson gave the defendants an average 47.2% less sentence than what the prosecutors recommended,” digital strategist Greg Price captioned a clip of the intense exchange on social media.

Cruz noted cases where Jackson gave significantly lighter sentences to convicts than what prosecutors were asking for.

In one case, for example, the judge gave a sentence of 28 months when a prosecutor was asking for 79-97 months, which Cruz noted was a 64% reduction in what was recommended. In another case, a prosecutor asked for 24 months and Jackson imposed a three-month sentence; an 88% reduction in what was recommended.

Cruz highlighted another four cases where Jackson doled out sentences lighter than what prosecutors asked for, which he said averaged out to a 47.2% reduction.

“Every single case, 100% of them, when prosecutors came before you with child pornography cases, you sentenced the defenders to substantially below, not just the guidelines, which are way higher, but what the prosecutor asked for, on average, of these cases, 47.2% less.”
1506349208416120837
“A couple of observations,” Jackson responded. “One, is that your chart does not include all of the factors that Congress has told judges to consider, including probation offices’ recommendations in these cases.”

“The committee has not been given the probation offices’ recommendations,” Cruz told Jackson. “I would love to see those, we don’t have access to them.”

“I take these cases very seriously,” Jackson said. “As a mother, as someone who, as a judge has to review the actual evidence in these cases, and based on Congress’ requirement, take into account, not only the sentencing guidelines, not only the recommendations of the parties, but also things like, the stories of the victims, also things like, the nature and circumstances of the events and the history and characteristics of the defendant.”

“Congress is the body that tells sentencing judges what they are supposed to look at,” she continued. “And, Congress has said, that the judge is not playing a numbers game. The judge is looking at all these different factors and making a determination in every case, based on a number of considerations. In every case, I did my duty to hold the defendants accountable in light of the evidence and the information that was presented to me.”

“In 100% of the cases, was the evidence less than the prosecutors asked for?” Cruz pressed.

“Judges have to take into account the personal circumstances of the defendant, because that’s a requirement of Congress,” Jackson answered, adding that she has to “consider things like the victims,” too.

“Well, that does not show victims being heard, with all due respect,” Cruz shot back.

Left-leaning sites like The New York Times have labeled Republicans’ attacks on Jackson’s record on child porn cases “misleading.” In one piece, The New York Times highlights a legal blog from Douglas A. Berman, a law professor from Ohio State University, to support their “fact-check”:


Mr. Berman wrote on his legal blog last week that federal sentencing guidelines for child sexual abuse imagery “are widely recognized as dysfunctional and unduly severe” and that “federal judges nationwide rarely follow them.”

“If and when we properly contextualize Judge Jackson’s sentencing record in federal child porn cases, it looks pretty mainstream,” he wrote.
1506351017390190594
In his opening statement, Cruz told Jackson he would not replicate the same “disgraceful behavior” some of his Democratic colleagues displayed during the confirmation hearings of now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. He also assured Jackson the confirmation would not be about her race.

“It’s not about race,” the Texas senator said. “We will see Democrats in the media suggest that any senator that is skeptical of your nomination, that questions you vigorously, or that dares to vote against you must somehow harbor racial animus. If that were the standard, I would note we are sitting on a committee where multiple members of this committee, the senior Democrats in the committee, happily filibustered Judge Janice Rogers Brown, a very qualified African-American woman nominated to the D.C. Circuit. And they did so precisely because they wanted to prevent Judge Brown from becoming Justice Brown, the first African-American woman. Joe Biden was among the Democrats filibustering the first African-American woman nominated the D.C. Circuit.”

WATCH the full exchange, below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLEZGsk_g0o

[lost in melb.]

Politics aside for a moment, how frequently do judges meet "prosecutor's recommendations" outside plea bargained cases. We are talking the extreme end of the spectrum, surely. Or put another way, how often do judges meet or exceed prosecutor's recommendations for sentencing?

perrhaps might have some insight.

[Muddy]

Yikes..! @Lances last post..

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Joe Silverstein | Fox News


https://i.imgur.com/EBKzJrs.png

CNN published an op-ed on Friday accusing Senate Republicans who questioned Ketanji Brown Jackson during her confirmation hearing of being extremists.

The article titled, "Extremists have their fingerprints all over the GOP," alleges questions from Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., were untruthful. CNN political analyst Julian Zelizer pointed to the senators alleging that Judge Jackson was lenient on child sex offender crimes.

"Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, for example, went after Jackson by trying to paint a misleading picture that she had been particularly lenient toward sex offenders," Zelizer wrote.

Republican senators questioned and criticized Jackson over her sentencing child pornography convicts for terms shorter than federal guidelines. In one case, Jackson sentenced an 18-year-old to three months in prison for possessing a large quantity of child pornography. Hawley criticized Jackson for her judgement and her comments where he alleges she expressed sympathy for the defendant and his family.

In addition, Jackson was also grilled by Republicans over whether she supported critical race theory. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, questioned Jackson about CRT curriculum being taught at a private school in Washington in which she is a board member. Zelizer dismissed critical race theory as a ‘boogeyman’ that Republicans have weaponized for political gain.

"Others fell back on another Republican boogeyman: critical race theory," he wrote.

According to the CNN political analyst, questioning Judge Jackson on her record constitutes norm-breaking behavior by the GOP.

"Throughout the confirmation hearings, Republicans tried to score cheap political points by delving into bizarre lines of argument -- all of which revealed how fringe talking points had become mainstream," Zelizer stated.

"Top elected officials were espousing claims that in earlier eras would have been considered too far off base to focus on during a televised proceeding," he continued. "The way in which the far right has influenced the mainstream Republican Party has been one of the pivotal stories in American politics in recent years. This radicalization has created a situation in Washington where one party has shifted further from center than the other."

Zelizer is a frequent critic of Republicans and often praises Democrats for their policy stances. Last summer, Zelizer argued elected officials were too focused on the rights of individuals and not the collective well-being of the nation when it came to fighting COVID-19. He advocated for mandatory vaccinations and vaccine passports.

"Biden and other political leaders need to start thinking about the good of the collective and not just the rights of the individual. Doing so is not some sort of move toward socialism, as conservative critics inevitably argue," Zelizer said. "Thinking of the common good is as American as apple pie."

[PorkChopSandwiches]

https://i0.wp.com/millennialpriestblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/cant-even-guy.jpg?w=400&ssl=1

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Susan Collins is going to vote to confirm. :|

[DemonGeminiX]

Idiot.

:-k

Maybe Joe Biden sucked her dick?

[DemonGeminiX]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gduPPk6gmRQ

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Susan Collins is going to vote to confirm. :|

Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Mitt Romney (R-UT) have both also announced they are going to vote to confirm, so it's a done deal. There would need to be 4 democrat defections for her nomination to crash and burn.

[DemonGeminiX]

:meh:

[Muddy]

Mitts been pretty controversial here lately..

[DemonGeminiX]

Those stupid assholes confirmed her.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Those stupid assholes confirmed her.

It was never in doubt with the 3 republicans that said they were voting for her. It was just a formality.