Ketanji Brown-Jackson's predicament

A month ago, Ketanji Brown-Jackson was a nobody outside legal circles. Today, every water cooler across America is talking about her. The talk about the Democrats' latest unqualified Supreme Court Justice nominee isn't flattering, thanks to this exchange with Tennessee Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn:

I'm confident that bumper stickers are being made as I type this post highlighting Ketanji Brown-Jackson's difficulties with the definition of the word woman. Dictionary.com's definition of the word woman is "an adult female person." That's the really unserious problem she has.

The deadly serious problem ketanji Brown-Jackson has deals with her child pornography sentencing history. Ted Cruz lit her up like a Christmas tree on her rulings:

"[In] United States vs. Chazin, the prosecutor asked for 78 to 97 months. You imposed 28 months. Twenty-eight months is a 64 percent reduction. In United States vs. Cooper, the prosecutor asked for 72 months, you imposed 60 months," Cruz listed. "That was a 17 percent reduction. In United States vs. Downs, the prosecutor asked for 70 months, you imposed 60 – that was a 14 percent reduction. United States vs. Hawkins, the prosecutor asked for 24 months, you imposed three months – that was an 80 percent reduction. In United States vs. Savage, the prosecutor asked for 49 months, you imposed 37 – that was a 24 percent reduction. In the United States vs. Stewart, the prosecutor asked for 97 months, you imposed 57 – that was a 40 percent reduction. Do you believe the voice of the children is heard when 100 percent of the time you’re sentencing those in possession of child pornography to far below what the prosecutors asking for?" Cruz asked.

"Yes Senator, I do," Jackson said, explaining that the chart did not include all the factors judges were tasked by Congress to consider, including the recommendation of probation officers. "We don’t have those provisions," Cruz interjected. "The committee has not been given the probation officers’ recommendation. We would welcome them."

Dick Durbin attempted to protect Judge Brown-Jackson:

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) attempted to head off potentially fraught inquiries after Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) raised seven child porn cases in which Jackson issued sentences that Hawley deemed too lenient during his opening statement Monday.

"He was questioning your sentencing record in child pornography cases that do not involve the production of pornographic material," Durbin told Jackson as the hearing began, citing tweets by Hawley that accused her of letting child porn offenders "off the hook. I thought about his charges as I watched you and your family listening carefully yesterday, and what impact that might have had on you personally…Could you tell us what was going through your mind at that point?" Durbin asked.

Based on Sen. Cruz's questioning, I'd argue that Judge Brown-Jackson is George Gascon soft-on-crime criminal advocate in a black robe. Sen. Durbin realizes that Sen. Cruz did damage to Brown-Jackson with his questioning. That's what this fight between Cruz and Durbin is about:

Sen. Cruz is right in asking why Judge Brown-Jackson consistently issued such light sentences on child pornographers. There is no justification for that many light sentences. How is that different than George Gascon refusing to prosecute criminals? Answer: there's little difference.

This isn't likely to prevent Jackson from getting confirmed, unfortunately. Democrats have too much invested in this charade.