백악관은 공화당 상원의원이 아동포르노 형량을 줄여준 트럼프 판사를 지지했다고 밝혔습니다.

백악관은 공화당 상원의원이 아동포르노 형량을 줄여준 트럼프 판사를 지지했다고 밝혔습니다., 백악관은 공화당 상원의원이 아동포르노 형량을 줄여준 트럼프 판사를 지지했다고 밝혔습니다., had sentenced child pornography offenders below the sentences sought by prosecutors or suggested by guidelines.

The pushback comes after Jackson spent more than 22 hours before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week and Republicans including Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Ted Cruz of Texas and Josh Hawley of Missouri repeatedly suggested that she had been too lenient in sentencing. Supporters of Jackson have complained that Democrats didn’t do enough to put the attacks into context and highlight evidence that she was in line with other federal judges on the issue at a time when guidelines are outdated.
“말로, the same GOP senators who have leveled these smears voted for Trump-nominated judges who sentenced the exact same crime in the same fashionbelow guidelines that are widely considered out of date and below sentences sought by the prosecution, as is the norm,” White House spokesman Andrew Bates said Thursday.
    These members are not only smearing Judge Jacksonthey are excoriating their own records,” Bates said. “Quantitatively, Judge Jackson departs from the guidelines by less than the average judge.
      The Judiciary Committee is set to vote on Jackson’s nomination on April 4. A full Senate vote could take place as early as that week as well. Democrats can confirm Jackson’s nomination to the Supreme Court without Republican support if every member of their caucus votes in favor, which appears on track to happen, and Vice President Kamala Harris breaks a tie.
        The White House reviewed a story by 워싱턴 포스트 that examined how some district judges who were nominated to the appeals court under Trump handled sentencing in child pornography and whether they followed the prosecutor’s recommendations. The Post found at least 18 instances when six GOP judges elevated to the appeals court did not follow the prosecutorsrecommendations.
        예를 들어, Judge Amul Thapar, who had once been on Trump’s list for the Supreme Court, is also a favorite of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, and now sits on the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals.
          When he served as a district court judge in the Eastern District of Kentucky, he sentenced a defendant for production of child pornography in United States v. Sherman to 360 개월 — 30 연령 — when his guidelines were life and the government recommended 1,080 개월 — 90 연령. A review of the transcript shows Thapar struggling with the case, taking into consideration various factors including the futures of the defendant’s children.
          In her testimony, Jackson spoke about all the factors she considered when handing down sentences. Hawley read extensively from court transcripts depicting the factors that Jackson considered.
          결국, Thapar concluded that while 100 years would be a deterrent he was not convinced that thesehealthy sentencesaren’t accomplishingas much deterrence as we want.
          For his confirmation to an appeals court, Thapar received the support of Republican members who still sit on the Senate Judiciary panel, including Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, 그레이엄, 텍사스의 존 코닌, GOP 상원의원, Biden의 백신 명령에 자금을 지원하기 위한 노력 재개, Cruz, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, 아칸소주 톰 코튼, John Kennedy of Louisiana and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.
          Another judge, Joseph Bianco, when he was serving on the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, sentenced one defendant for distribution of child pornography to 60 months when his guidelines were 151 ...에 188 months and the government had asked for more.
          Bates stressed that the judges, like Jackson, had departed at times from the guidelines or what the prosecution had requested.
          And in the overwhelming majority of her cases involving child sex crimes, the sentences Judge Jackson imposed were consistent with or above what US Probation Office or the government recommended,” Bates said.
          A CNN review of the material showed that Jackson had mostly followed the common judicial sentencing practices in these kinds of cases and that Hawley took some of her comments out of context.
          At the hearing, Hawley pressed Jackson repeatedly about a handful of cases where he said she had departed from the guidelines. At one point he criticized her for saying that she alone had studied the entirety of the case before handing down a sentencehighlighting one case in particular.
          As you’ve emphasized to this committee over and over, you’ve lived it, 권리? You said that you’ve been through all of this. You’ve looked at the images. You’re the one who’s had to endure all of it. You gave him a three-month sentence. I just wonder if you regret it or you stand by it.
          Growing exasperated, Jackson said that in every case, “I followed what Congress authorized me to do and looking to the best of my ability at all of the various factors that apply that constrain judges that give us discretion but also tell us how to sentence.
          Later she added, “What I regret is that in a hearing about my qualifications to be a justice on the Supreme Court, we’ve spent a lot of time focusing on this small subset of my sentences.
          Retired federal judges — 은퇴한 연방 판사는 아동 포르노 사건에 대한 Ketanji Brown Jackson의 기록을 '완전히 일관적'이라고 옹호합니다. — had already filed a letter with the committee maintaining that Jackson’s sentences wereentirely consistentwith the records of other judges across the country. They noted that to the extent she had departed from guidelines it was within the mainstream of what other judges were doing nationwide, in part because bipartisan and unanimous reports from the US Sentencing Commission had strongly criticized the guidelinestreatment of child pornography asunduly severein so-called non-production cases, in which the defendant looked at pornography but did not manufacture, produce or purvey it.
            The letter said federal judgesnationwide rarely followed them.
            Jackson herself explained why the guidelines were often outdated. She noted that the guideline was crafted at a time when more serious child pornography offenders were identifiedbased on the number of photographs that they received in the mail.But the introduction of the internet led to extreme disparities in the system, “because it is so easy for people to get volumes of this kind of material now,” 그녀가 말했다.

            댓글이 닫혀 있습니다..