Biden's SCOTUS nominee once argued judicial system is 'unfair' to sexual predators

No Wonder Democrats And Elites Love Her.

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 atten­tive 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...

Racism: The REAL reason the U.S. attacked Japan during World War 2.

A course titled “Global Whiteness” taught at the University of North Carolina blames the West and the United States for the war against Japan during World War II.

Among the topics discussed by students in Professor Mark Driscoll’s class are Donald Trump’s racism and “interracial hookups on campus.”

According to the syllabus obtained by Campus Reform, the course covers the concept of race since the 19th century, but it also provides revisionist narratives of American history, particularly the second world war.

It describes WWII’s Pacific theater fight as “the first global attack on white Anglo-American hegemony” and “Japan’s attempt to roll back Euro-American colonialism.”

One of the course’s required text is Theodore Allen’s “The Invention of the White Race, vol. 2: The Origin of Racial Oppression in Anglo-America.”

Driscoll, an adjunct instructor in Global Studies, says in the syllabus’s “Methods” section that he cannot “emphasize enough” the “partial and incomplete nature of professorial knowledge,” and that students have a “right and duty” to seek out “alternate truths.”.


“Alternate Truths?” I would have thought “Alternate Viewpoints” might be what a college should be teaching.

There will also be readings from Ibram X. Kendi in Introduction to Racial Science, “Enlightenment or Enwhitenment?”, “Criminalization of Blackness” and “Whiteness Dispossessed (Whiteness After Obama).”

According to a syllabus previously reviewed by Campus Reform, an earlier version of the course, taught in 2019, included a class session titled “Nasty, Angry White People.”

Students in the course will be required to give a presentation based on any one of 32 listed topics.

And topics on which students can do presentations include:

— “How is Trump racist?”

— “Black/white hooking up at UNC”

— “White/Asian hooking up at UNC.”

— “White Trash”

— “Whites in Hip-hop”

— “Should white people pay reparations for slavery?”

— “War on Terror (and racialization of Muslims)”

— “Killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri”

— “1619 Project”

In his faculty page, Driscoll notes he “explores colonially influenced transformations in political and economic organization, philosophy, psychology, and literature, with a focus on...

Morning Mistress

The 90 Miles Mystery Video: Nyctophilia Edition #944

Before You Click On The "Read More" Link, 

Please Only Do So If You Are Over 21 Years Old.

If You are Easily Upset, Triggered Or Offended, This Is Not The Place For You.  

Please Leave Silently Into The Night......

The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #1644

You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside? 

It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific, 

from the beautiful to the repugnant, 

from the mysterious to the familiar.

If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed, 

you could be inspired, you could be appalled. 

This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended. 

You have been warned.

Hot Pick Of The Late Night

Four Doctors Vs. Vaccine Policy...

How The Biden Administration Has Cleared The Way For China's Theft And Espionage...

Girls With Guns

Visage à trois #85

 Three Videos For Your Viewing Pleasure:

La petite mort bonus video:

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #266

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #265

The Suicide of a January 6 Defendant: ‘They Broke Him’

Matthew Perna was failed by the country he loved.

Matthew Perna did nothing wrong on January 6, 2021.

The Pennsylvania man walked through an open door on the Senate side of the building shortly before 3 p.m. that afternoon. Capitol police, shown in surveillance video, stood by as hundreds of Americans entered the Capitol. Wearing a “Make America Great Again” sweatshirt, Perna, 37, left after about 20 minutes.

Less than two weeks later, Perna was ensnared in what the former top U.S. prosecutor called a “shock and awe” campaign to round up Trump supporters and deter them from demonstrating at Joe Biden’s inauguration on January 20, 2021. After he discovered his image on the FBI’s most wanted list for January 6, Perna immediately contacted his local FBI office and voluntarily submitted to questioning; on January 18, six FBI agents arrested Perna at his home.

His life from that point turned into a nightmare. Perna was indicted by a grand jury in February 2021 on four counts including obstruction of an official proceeding and trespassing misdemeanors. Despite his nonviolent participation in the events of that day—he did not assault anyone, carry a weapon, or vandalize property—Biden’s Justice Department and local news media nonetheless made his life pure hell.

Whenever his hometown paper, the Sharon Herald, published an article on its social media account about Perna, the majority of replies were “horrible and brutal,” his aunt, Geri Perna, told me on the phone Sunday. After more than a year of legal and public torture, Perna saw no way out.

On Friday night, Matthew Perna hung himself in his garage.

“They broke him, they mentally broke him,” Geri said through racking sobs as she explained why her loved one ended his life. “He had run out of hope. I know he couldn’t take it any more.”

In December, at the behest of his defense attorney, Perna agreed to plead guilty to all four counts. With no criminal record and no violent conduct on January 6, Perna and his family expected a prison sentence of less than a year; Perna’s sentencing hearing was scheduled for March 3, the seven-year anniversary of his mother’s death.

But Matthew Graves, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia handling every January 6 prosecution, intervened and asked the court to delay Perna’s sentencing so his office could make sure Capitol defendants are punished equally. “While every case and every defendant are different, the Government is attempting to ensure that similarly situated January 6 defendants are treated in the same manner,” Graves wrote in a motion on February 11. “The Government is attempting to do that in this case and that requires additional time for the Government’s internal review process to be completed.”

This was very bad news for Perna. Graves’ office has sought lengthy prison terms for defendants who plead guilty to the obstruction felony. In the case of Jacob Chansley, who, like Perna, committed no violent act on January 6 and was allowed into the building by police, Biden’s Justice Department sought 51 months in jail and three years probation. (Judge Royce Lamberth sentenced him to 41 months.)

In sentencing recommendations on obstruction pleas, prosecutors have compared defendants to domestic terrorists and asked judges to act accordingly. “The need to deter others is especially strong in cases involving domestic terrorism, which the breach of the Capitol certainly was,” one of Graves’ prosecutors wrote in Chansley’s sentencing memo. “The sentence of this Court must drive home this fact for this defendant, and any others who may wish to emulate him: crimes committed against this country and democracy will be prosecuted and punished in accordance with the law.”

That appears to be what Graves would have demanded in Perna’s case as well.

When Perna learned his sentencing hearing was again delayed, he called his aunt. “‘I am guilty, I am guilty!” he told her. “He said that he deserved whatever punishment they were going to give him. That was the last straw. The constant harassment was...