The Facts on Judge Jackson’s Sentencing in Child Porn Cases

The first two days of Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson have been preoccupied, in large part, by a contentious debate over the judge’s sentencing in child pornography cases.

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have accused Jackson of displaying “a consistent pattern of giving child porn offenders lighter sentences,” as Sen. Marsha Blackburn said. In making their case, Republicans compared Jackson’s sentences with the federal sentencing guidelines and/or the recommendations of government prosecutors.

Democrats and the judge herself say she consistently weighs all statutory factors concerning sentencing — including the recommended sentence in the probation officer’s presentencing reports, which the Republicans did not consider. In that context, Jackson’s sentences in cases involving child porn “matched the recommendation by either the prosecution or the probation office in most of the cases,” as Sen. Richard Blumenthal noted and Jackson agreed.

In addition, Democrats say most judges — not just Jackson — handed down sentences that were below the ranges determined by the federal sentencing guidelines for non-production child pornography, which is the receipt, possession or distribution of such material. “In fiscal year 2019, less than one-third (30.0%) of non-production child pornography offenders received a sentence within the guideline range,” according to a 2021 report by the U.S. Sentencing Commission cited during the hearings.  

The U.S. Sentencing Commission itself has become ensnared in the partisan dispute, of the commission, from 2010 to 2014, when the commission issued a in 2012 that recommended Congress revise the federal sentencing guidelines for non-production child pornography offenders. The guidelines date to when child pornography was distributed via snail mail, not the internet, and they include enhanced penalties based on the volume of a predator’s collection.