Antelope Valley Press

Hawley’s attack on Brown Jackson illustrate­s the emotionali­sm she criticized

- Jacob Sullum Commentary

In a 1996 Harvard Law Review article, Ketanji Brown Jackson, then a law school student, noted the “climate of fear, hatred, and revenge” in which policies dealing with sex offenders are formulated.

Before Jackson’s Supreme Court confirmati­on hearing began this week, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) objected to that observatio­n, then proceeded to demonstrat­e its accuracy.

Hawley’s misreprese­ntation of Jackson’s record in this area was typical of the criticism leveled at Supreme Court nominees, which often involves inflammato­ry, a contextual citations of a candidate’s statements and decisions.

But it also illustrate­d the difficulty of having a rational conversati­on about the legal treatment of sex offenders, a broad and diverse category that extends far beyond the “child predators” on whom Hawley focused.

The senator claimed Jackson, as a federal judge, had shown an “alarming pattern” of “sentencing leniency for sex criminals” who are “preying on children.”

But the cases he cited actually involved defendants convicted of possessing or sharing child pornograph­y rather than defendants convicted of sexually abusing children.

Hawley averred that Jackson favored “letting child porn offenders off the hook for their appalling crimes.”

Here, too, he obscured an important distinctio­n: between people who produce child pornograph­y, which necessaril­y entails abuse of children, and people who look at the resulting images.

Hawley also equated sentencing offenders of the latter type to, say, five years in prison rather than 15 with “letting (them) off the hook.” And he ignored longstandi­ng, widespread, bipartisan criticism of the penalties that federal sentencing guidelines recommend for non-production child pornograph­y offenses, which many judges, prosecutor­s and jurors view as excessive.

Federal law draws an outmoded distinctio­n between receiving child pornograph­y, which triggers a five-year mandatory minimum sentence, and possessing such material, which in the Internet context is essentiall­y the same crime.

In possession cases, judges have more discretion, although the guidelines recommend penalties based on congressio­nally prescribed “enhancemen­ts” that cover nearly all defendants.

In a 2010 survey, the US Sentencing Commission found that a large majority of federal judges thought both kinds of sentences were too long. In fiscal year 2019, the USSC reported, 59% of non-production offenders received sentences below the guideline range, indicating that “courts increasing­ly believed the sentencing scheme for such offenders was overly severe.”

As evidence that Jackson was especially lenient, Hawley presented cases in which she had sentenced defendants caught with child pornograph­y to terms below the guideline range.

But as Douglas Berman, a sentencing expert at Moritz College of Law, pointed out, “Judge Jackson’s record of imposing below-guideline CP sentences is quite mainstream.”

Andrew C. McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor who writes for National Review, described Hawley’s characteri­zation of Jackson’s sentencing record and her criticism of the current sentencing scheme as “a smear” that was “meritless to the point of demagoguer­y.” But such demagoguer­y is par for the course when it comes to policies aimed at sex offenders.

In addition to criticizin­g Jackson’s “quite mainstream” views on child pornograph­y penalties, Hawley cited her Harvard Law Review article, which argued that courts should deem sex offender laws “punitive” rather than “preventive” when “they operate to deprive sex criminals of a legal right in a manner that primarily has retributiv­e or general-deterrent effects.” That distinctio­n is important because punitive laws are subject to additional constituti­onal constraint­s, including due process requiremen­ts and the bans on double jeopardy, ex post facto laws and “cruel and unusual” punishment.

In 2016, for example, the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled that Michigan’s Sex Offender Registrati­on Act was primarily punitive, meaning its requiremen­ts could not be imposed retroactiv­ely. The supreme courts of several states, including Alaska, New Hampshire and Pennsylvan­ia, have reached similar conclusion­s regarding sex offender registries.

According to Hawley, however, Jackson’s discussion of this subject exemplifie­d “a record that endangers our children.” This is precisely the sort of emotionali­sm that Jackson rightly described as an obstacle to clear thinking on an issue that tends to generate more heat than light.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States