The Article III Project Research – Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s 8-year Record of Granting Excessively Lenient Sentences in at least 8 of 8 (100%) Child Pornography Cases


Article III Project (A3P) today released new research on Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s excessively lenient sentencing record toward criminals charged with distributing and possessing child pornography. A3P obtained the eight sentencing transcripts and seven prosecutor sentencing recommendations (eighth under seal) for eight separate cases regarding child pornography where Judge Jackson handed down sentences that were below the United States Sentencing Guidlines, a pattern that A3P has found through research since the beginning of the nomination process. The eighth case was reported by Fox News after the hearing, leading to speculation of a cover-up. Yesterday, A3P launched a set of ads calling on U.S. Senators to vote against Judge Jackson’s nomination.
“Judge Jackson’s consistent record of excessive leniency and excuse-making for child sex predators is not only deeply disturbing; it’s disqualifying. The responsibility of a judge is to exercise sound judgment. Judge Jackson failed in this regard in 8 of 8 child pornography cases, and now many child sex predators are back on the streets waiting to get caught reoffending.
“We already know of one who reoffended after Judge Jackson let him off the hook with just 3 months instead of the recommended 8 years – and she didn’t even order routine computer monitoring following his release. When she had discretion in sentencing, Judge Jackson always sentenced these monsters to significantly less time than what the federal guidelines recommended – and 47% (possession) and 57% (distribution) below the national average. She blames federal statute, pretending that it forces her to grant extreme leniency every time. Judge Jackson even tries to blame other judges and pretends she’s within the judicial mainstream, by citing one-off cases and cherry-picking statistics. But she’s clearly not a mainstream judge.
“Judge Jackson’s decade-long sentencing record for dangerous pedophiles is as extreme as it gets. She has a policy of granting excessive leniency in every single child pornography case she can, after serving as the tip of the spear in changing federal sentencing policy for child pornographers as vice chair of the U.S. Sentencing Commission in 2012. She did this by ignoring two expert witnesses – a Columbia Medical School psychiatrist and a federal prosecutor – and concocting her dangerous theory that child pornographers are somehow not dangerous pedophiles who belong in prison for longer periods. She’s dangerously wrong.
[the_ad id=”157875″]
“Judge Jackson’s 25-year legal record makes clear that she thinks our child-sex predator laws are too harsh. She ignores expert recommendations. She ignores evidence. She ignores prosecutors. She ignores the federal guidelines. She blames her staff. But she only has herself to blame. One wonders what would lead her to make these decisions and why she decided to make this a pet cause of hers. Regardless, these records prove just how heinous the sex torture crimes of young kids – even babies – committed were and just how dangerous Judge Jackson would be for child safety if she were to be elevated to the highest court in the land for the rest of her life. Senators must vote against her nomination.” – Article III Project Founder and President Mike Davis.
The full sentencing transcripts, prosecutor memos, and sentencing details can be found here. A3P was among the first to conduct comprehensive research on this issue, releasing documents that revealed Judge Jackson believed sentences and punishments for sex offenders were too harsh. Davis has led the effort to pressure Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) to end his cover-up of Judge Jackson’s leniency for child sex predators. The most recent batch of A3P research demonstrated a decade-long pattern by Judge Jackson of defying experts’ testimony and handing down sentences that were excessively less than what was recommended for those who have committed child sex crimes.

Read more
Details of all 8 cases here

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

We’ve heard from most of the RINO GOPe that they, even they, won’t, can’t bring themselves to vote for her.
But are there NO Dems who still have a sense of decency to go public with a NO vote for Ketanji?

This person has no business being on the Supreme Court let alone any other court. Her lie leniency toward child rapists and torturers is despicable.

Deadlock vote out of committee This nominee is in serious trouble

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s inquisitors have undermined their own credibility

Following President Biden’s nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, Republican senators promised that the confirmation hearings would be “respectful,” and not “a spectacle.” Spurious attacks, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) warned, “could undermine the Court’s legitimacy.”

The Judiciary Committee proceedings, however, were a farce, featuring faux outrage, interruptions, grandstanding, and cheap shots at Judge Jackson’s record, designed to score political points on issues unrelated to her decisions, judicial philosophy or methodology.

With the Judiciary Committee vote scheduled for April 4, it may be useful to review the conduct of Republicans.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) claimed Judge Jackson attacked pro-life women. “When you go to church, and knowing there are pro-life women there,” Blackburn asked, “do you look at them, thinking of them in that way, that they’re noisy, hostile, in your face? Do you think of pro-life women like me in that way?”

Jackson had, indeed, used the phrase “hostile, noisy crowd” — but she was referring to angry protestors confronting pregnant women in her support for buffer zones around clinics. She was not denigrating all — or even most — pro-life women.

Sen. Blackburn also asserted that Jackson “used her time and talent not to serve our nation’s veterans or other vulnerable groups, but to provide free legal services to help terrorists get out of Gitmo and go back to the fight.” Although Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) praised Jackson for representing Guantanamo Bay detainees when she was a public defender (“Everybody deserves a lawyer. You’re doing the country a great service when you defend the most unpopular people”), he chastised her for helping these men when she was in private practice. “I hope they all die in jail,” Graham declared, and then stormed out of the hearing. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) asked if Jackson wanted to apprehend “more murderers or fewer murderers” and whether she thought Americans would be safer if detainees were released.

As a public defender, Jackson was assigned to help four detainees file habeas corpus petitions. None of them had been charged, tried, or convicted of a crime. In private practice, she worked pro bono on one of these cases. It’s worth noting: Only 12 of the 780 individuals who have been incarcerated in Gitmo have been charged; only two have been convicted. The Supreme Court has ruled that Guantanamo Bay prisoners have a right to challenge their detentions in U.S. courts.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) asked Judge Jackson, a member of the Board of Trustees of Georgetown Day School, if she agreed with the assertion in “Antiracist Baby,” a book taught in pre-K through 2nd grade classes at the school, that “babies are racists.” Brown said, “I do not believe that any child should be made to feel as though they are racist, or as though they are not valued, or they are less than, that they are victims, that they are oppressors. I do not believe any of that.”

Undeterred, Cruz asked if Jackson had read any of the children’s books assigned at the school. “I have not,” she replied. “They don’t come up in my work as a judge, which I am respectfully here to address.”

Republican senators used most of their time interrogating Judge Jackson on the sentences she imposed on child pornographers when she was a district judge, a task she would not perform on the High Court. In a long Twitter thread, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) maintained that “Judge Jackson has a pattern of letting child porn offenders off the hook for appalling crimes, both as a judge and as a policy member.” In every case, he claimed, “for which we have records, Judge Jackson deviated from the federal sentencing guidelines in favor of child porn offenders.” 

“Do you believe child predators are misunderstood?” Sen. Blackburn asked her. The way to deter child pornographers, proclaimed Sen. Graham (who voted to appoint Jackson to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 2021), “is to put their asses in jail, not supervise their computer usage.” He would be happy to see anyone looking at child pornography on a computer sentenced to prison for 50 years, he said, adding: “You don’t think that’s a bad thing.”

Jackson’s inquisitors didn’t mention that in more than two-thirds of such cases, her fellow judges issued sentences below federal sentencing guidelines — or that most judges and prosecutors distinguish between people who watch or exchange pornography and those who produce it and commit child abuse — or that many district judges nominated by Republican presidents to appeals courts did not follow prosecutors’ recommendations.

They did not acknowledge that Judge Jackson generally agreed with those recommendations in cases involving both possession of child pornography and attempted or actual sexual abuse of a minor. 

They didn’t mention — contrary to Sen. Graham’s allegations — that her sentences included time in prison and supervision following release, or that the bi-partisan Sentencing Commission has informed Congress that guidelines in crimes involving images of child sexual abuse “fail to differentiate among offenders in terms of their culpability,” resulting in penalty ranges that “are too severe for some offenders and too lenient for other offenders.”

The Judiciary Committee farce may or may not undermine the legitimacy of the Supreme Court. But, as Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) indicated on Wednesday, it does demonstrate that the confirmation process is “broken.” And it should undermine the credibility of her Republican colleagues, who turned an investigation into an inquisition.

Of course they didn’t mention any of that, because it would reveal what a load of partisan horse manure they were shoveling.

Last edited 2 years ago by Greg


she is a threat to the safety of children.

her poor judgment has done her in

Last edited 2 years ago by TrumpWon

You don’t seem to be addressing any of the FACTS that the article cites. An oversight, no doubt.

Your article is a waste of time.

This judge has a problem a fanboys like you don’t excuse her poor judgement

Your article is a waste of time.

Knowing the facts before deciding is NEVER a waste of time.

It’s all in her facial expressions and lack of self-control.

Should never be anywhere close to the SC, much less our Capitol.

She’s unfit and will cause upheaval in our country if allowed to pose as a SC Justice.

She’s not on the level, or does she have the moral fiber needed for such an important position within our Republic.

Unable to define what a woman is, Jackson has shown she’s part of the religious Left and cannot be counted on for such a huge responsibility.

Perhaps she should go study biology, instead.

Unable to define what a woman is, Jackson has shown she’s part of the religious Left and cannot be counted on for such a huge responsibility.

She’s not unable to define what a woman is; she simply can’t give a valid definition that fits her prejudices, so she lies and says she can’t. That’s a disqualification.


What goes around, comes around asshole.

There’s real concerns about Jackson’s competence and moral character. We need people who understand right and wrong sitting in the SC chairs, not activists being rewarded for a racist dictator’s agenda.

At least the GOP isn’t just making things up like Dems did to Kavanaugh.

“Inquisition” What a joke.

That’s the new woke Left, pitchforks in hand.

Your facts are flawed.

She is not proper judge material for the nation’s highest court period, full stop

There are a handful of democrat senators up for reelection who if they vote yay, will be a career ending vote.

Last edited 2 years ago by TrumpWon

Your facts are flawed.

Of course you can’t explain what’s ‘flawed’ about them, can you?

“Everyone else give light sentences to pedophiles too!” isn’t a defense, dumbass.

It’s an excuse.

She’s unfit.

Of course you can’t explain what’s ‘flawed’ about them, can you?

It’s simple. NO Republicans asked any loaded or unanswerable questions. They all pertained and related to her history of poor judgement, light sentences, deviating from the law and subscribing to racist ideology. The “flaws” (read, BULLSHIT) is that the questions were harsh and unreasonable.

The article is partisan tripe.

Easily dismissed. Just like Jackson.

As I previously stated, a waste of time

The simple-minded can easily dismiss just about anything.
Trump is a leader of the simple-minded.
Unfortunately, reality isn’t simple.
You can’t dumb it down, and expect to get good results.

Last edited 2 years ago by Greg

You can.

And you obviously miss the connections between installing a pedophile-friendly judge with a woke religion grooming children with LGBT anti-science, and a publicly pedophiliac dictator now soundly recorded as touching children inappropriately.

Do you f*ck kids, too?

I grow weary of the pro-Pedophilia and child pornography horseshit

Last edited 2 years ago by TrumpWon

The simple-minded can easily dismiss just about anything.

They say confession is good for the soul. Is it?

Your article cites no facts. Proving your article is true is YOUR responsibility, as you declare each and every time someone posts an article you can’t bear to look at.

They should have accused her of being a child rapist and then expect her to prove she isn’t. That was the rule the Democrats established for Kavanaugh. Though she was exposed as being unqualified, biased and racist, she got more than fair treatment and got off light compared to what Democrats do to nominees.

It doesn’t matter; her confirmation is now all but assured. Two of the worst Republicans, Murkowski and Collins, have declared they are afraid of being called racist and will cast a racist vote for a racist Supreme Court Justice.

Sure… Jackson went to school and graduated. She got a law degree. She pass the Bar. She became a judge. She knows codes and laws. She bears those qualifications. But, she has not exhibited the qualification of impartial justice and decisions. She has shown she listens to her own biases, prejudices and ideology to decide, not the Constitution or the rule of law. In this respect… the most important respect… she is grossly UNqualified.

But, little does that matter. All that really qualifies her are those two boxes to check; female (or is she? After all, I’m no biologist) and black.

Romney is a moron. Utah needs to primary him out of the Senate

Romney needs to run Trump out of the list of 2024 contenders. Trump is no longer electable.

Last edited 2 years ago by Greg

and the village idiot thinks Romney is electable?

and the village idiot thinks Romney is electable?

You tell me.

Mitt Romney is about as electable as Joe Biden.

He’s not.

Last edited 2 years ago by Nathan Blue

Joe Biden was ALREADY elected.

Joe Biden was ALREADY elected.

In the Senate and for VP. Never for President.

Your link doesn’t work.

EXCLUSIVE: DEMOCRATS IMPLICATED — Georgia Ballot Traffickers Were Using Democrat Officials’ Offices as Stopping Points During Ballot Drop Runs


Not quite, Cletus. You have to win a presidential election for that.

I’m afraid his popularity of the Galaxy draw says otherwise.

The presidency today with more legal votes then he got in 2020.

Overwhelming majority of Biden voters now see how badly they were tricked.

Overwhelming majority of Biden voters now see how badly they were tricked.

You spelled “f**ked” wrong.


They have something BIG on Romney, for him to act like a Democrat in all ways.

Sorry, Spartacus Booker, after the attacks on Kavanaugh by the Democrats, based entirely on LIES, you don’t get to complain that asking questions about Jackson’s judgements and ideological background is creating a “caricature”. Damn, you Democrats are the WORST form of hypocritical scumbag lying crybabies.