dedication to ensuring the communities are safe and the interest of justice are served. i find it hard to believe that these organizations having looked closely at your judicial record, your lifetime conduct would have taken those unusual steps to be that forceful in supporting you if, in fact, you had somehow a disturbing record of coddling child pornographers. you re an even handed and impartial judge. i can say that when you look at cases that you ruled on that involve very politically charged or partisan interest. you ve delivered rulings on both sides for plaintiffs and defendants and in my review of your record, you put any personal views or concerns aside. you based your decision on the argument of the party, the fact and the record.
safe and that the interests of justice are served. i find it hard to believe that these organizations having looked closely at your judicial decisioning record, your sentencing decisions, your lifetime conduct, would have taken those unusual steps to be that forceful in supporting you if in fact you had somehow a disturbing record of coddling child pornographers or being soft on crime. in fact, judge, your record in my view demonstrates you re an evenhanded and impartial judge, and i can see that when i look at cases you ve ruled on that involve very politically charged or partisan interests. you ve delivered rulings on both sides for plaintiffs and defendants, and in my review of your record you ve put any personal views or concerns aside. you ve based your decisions on the argument of the parties, the facts in the record, the applicable law and precedent, and the well-reasoned and
during your time as a judge displayed your dedication to ensuring on communities are safe. i find it hard to believe that these organizations having looked closely at your sentencing decisions, your lifetime conduct would have taken those unusual steps to be that forceful in supporting you, if in fact you had somehow a disturbing report of coddling child pornographiers on being soft on crime. in fact, your record demonstrates you re an even-handand impartial judge. i can look at that in very politically charged or partisan interests. you ve delivered rulings on both sides for plaintiffs and defendants and in my review of your records, you put any personal views aside, based your decisions on the arguments of
0 stems back decades and that is concerning. you wrote your note on the harvard law review on sex crimes. your note is your major academic work on the law review and yours is entitled prevention versus punishment: towards a principled distinction in the restraint of released sex offenders. and in it you argue, and i quote, a recent spate of legislation purports to regulate released sex offenders by requiring them to register with local law enforcement officials, notify community members of their presence, undergo dna testing and submit to civil commitment for an indefinite term. at many courts and commentators herald these laws as valid regulatory measures, others reject them as punitive enactments that violate the rights of individuals who have already been sanctioned for their crimes. under existing doctrine the constitutionality of sex offender statutes depends upon their characterization as essentially preventative rather than punitive. and what you go on to explain is if they
0 activism and advocacy as it concerns sexual predators that stems back decades and that is concerning. you wrote your note on the harvard law review on sex crimes. your note is your major academic work on the law review prevention versus punishment toward a principled distinction in the restraint in it you argue and i quote a recent spate of legislation reports to release sex offenders by requiring them to notify local law enforcement and submit to civil commitment for indefinite term. many say it violates the rights of individuals that have been sanctioned for their crimes. the contusionalty of sex offender statutes depends on their characterization as essentially preventsive rather than punitive. you explain if they re viewed an punitive, they re unconstitutional. if they re preventative, they are not. throughout the course of your note, you argue they should be viewed as punitive and therefore unconstitutional. indeed in the second to last page you go through each of those for ca