Republican Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley hit back at a reporter Monday questioning his alleged past support of judges with a lenient record surrounding child pornography cases.
ABC News Congressional correspondent Rachel Scott pressed the senator after reciting his opening statement at the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson, where he raised concern about Jackson’s record on child pornography cases.
“But how is it acceptable for a lower court, if it’s not acceptable for a higher court,” Scott asked. Hawley responded that he does not know which judges she referred to.
“We have looked through your record and it shows that you have voted for at least three federal judges that have imposed lighter sanctions on child porn offenders, so how do you square that?” Scott continued.
After his opening statement at Judge Jackson’s nomination hearing, ABC News tried to play “gotcha” with Sen. Hawley, repeating the White House’s latest talking points verbatim. But when pressed on the facts, they had nothing.
Hear the full exchange below. pic.twitter.com/zGDsmVY2QT
— Senator Hawley Press Office (@SenHawleyPress) March 21, 2022
“Same answer, not for this court,” Hawley replied. “And, I think this pattern is going to be a problem wherever I’m aware of it. In this instance, I know that’s a White House talking point, but I think it’s a dangerous one. You gotta be careful with that. It’s the old ‘Well, everyone else is jumping off a cliff, so I will too.'”
She then asked the senator if he regrets voting for the judges, to which he repeatedly asked for the cases she was referring to. (RELATED: Andrew McCarthy Pushes Back On Sen. Josh Hawley’s Criticism Of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson)
“Shouldn’t you be familiar with them, as well?” she pressed.
“But what were the cases?” Hawley hit back. “You don’t know their record. What cases? Was it after their confirmation or before?”
“Do you expect me to just—,” Scott began.
“Well, I expect you to know the facts that you ask me about,” Hawley interjected. “So how many cases did they have? Judge Jackson had seven. I just listed them. So what are the ones that these judges have?”
Scott began to defend her questioning before Hawley interrupted.
“So, you don’t know. You’re just here to do a ‘gotcha,'” he said. “When you know the facts, get back to me. Good luck!”
Hawley first alleged Jackson’s lenient sentencing on child pornography convicts in a Wednesday Twitter thread, citing ten cases that had not been sentenced under mandatory minimum guidelines. He cited the case United States v. Hawkins, in which Jackson sentenced a child porn offender to 3 months imprisonment, though the Sentencing Guidelines recommend up to 10 years.
He also alleged that Jackson pushed to eliminate mandatory minimum guidelines for child pornography cases and had questioned sending sex offenders to civil commitment, an institutionalization of a convict viewed as an endangerment to society.
During Monday’s opening statements, however, the senator assured he is “not interested in trapping Judge Jackson,” but expects she will have a “coherent view and explanation” surrounding her record.
“I’m interested in her answer because I found in our time together that she was enormously thoughtful, enormously accomplished, and I suspect has a coherent view and explanation and a way of thinking about this that I look forward to hearing and I think she deserves the chance to talk about it,” he said.