Charlie Kirk on Supreme Court Nominee: “Jackson Is a Democrat Partisan”
Viewpoint
Audio By Carbonatix
Published: March 23, 2022 | Date of Source Audio: March 21, 2022
Transcribed and modified for publication from the original audio program
Charlie Kirk renders judgment on Ketanji Brown Jackson’s disturbing record
Charlie Kirk: So, let's get into some of the background of Ketanji Brown Jackson. Jackson worked as a lawyer for several terrorists detained at Guantanamo Bay – Gitmo – including a Taliban intelligence officer who is likely a leader of a terrorist cell. Jackson was a public defender, so you can't blame her for representing terrorists. Everyone needs and deserves representation. But Jackson's advocacy for these terrorists was zealous and going beyond just giving them a competent defense. Despite Jackson's claim that she did not get to choose her clients as a public defender, she continued to advocate for these Gitmo terrorists when she went into private practice.
Jackson is a Democrat partisan. She worked for the Obama presidential campaign and as a poll monitor and donated to Obama. Jackson is a registered Democrat and her husband donated $1,600 to Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign.
Since her appointment to the D.C. Circuit last June, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson has yet to publish a single opinion. Here's some other things that she's best known for. She blocked President Trump's executive orders to hold failing federal employees accountable, a decision that the D.C. Circuit unanimously reversed. Jackson blocked the Trump administration from expanding its expedited removal program to deport illegals faster, absurdly saying that DHS did not consider the impact on illegal immigrants. Then a left-wing immigration group applauded Ketanji Brown Jackson for refusing to use the term “alien” or “illegal.”
“One of her crusades in life has been that we need to go out of our way to go protect sex offenders.”
But there's another very disturbing wrinkle and development in her history as a judge. As far back as in law school, Judge Jackson – who by the way, is now up for advise and consent in front of the United States Senate – has questioned making convicts register as sex offenders. One of her crusades in life has been that we need to go out of our way to go protect sex offenders. She said that it has led to stigmatization and ostracization. She suggested public policy is driven by quote, “a climate of fear, hatred and revenge against sex offenders.”
As a member of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, Judge Jackson advocated for dramatic changes in how the law treats sex offenders by eliminating the existing mandatory minimum sentences for child pornography. In her time on the U.S. Sentencing Commission, Judge Jackson quote, “mistakenly assumed that child pornography offenders are pedophiles,” quote “to understand this category of non-pedophiles who obtain child pornography.”
Judge Jackson was given an opportunity to sentence someone who was a sex offender. And even though the government was recommending 10 years of prison, Judge Jackson sentenced the perpetrator to only three months in prison. Three months.
Why is she so soft and why does she have a soft spot for people that commit some of the most heinous unspeakable crimes in our nation? Is the Republican Party going to ask about this? Are the Senate Republicans going to ask Ketanji Brown Jackson about these rulings and these opinions?
