This is what Turley has to say.....
The senators are fighting over the pre-sentence reports in Judge Jackson's child pornography cases. Jackson just testified that you need to see not just the prosecutor's filing but the PSR to understand the case. The GOP pounced on the comments and demanded the PSRs...— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) March 23, 2022
...Sen. Durbin is objecting that the move would "put lives at risk" and he is not willing to risk lives. He is clearly correct that these PSRs contain information that should not be made public. However, without dealing with the value of the PSRs, they can be redacted...
...Confirmations often deal with FBI reports that contain similarly confidential and raw information from field investigations. Durbin has accused the GOP of endangering lives of innocent persons...
... Once again, there could be objections to the weight given to the PSR, but I think the accusation of endangering lives ignores the ability to redact material. I have worked with PSRs and most of the recommendations are focused on guideline calculations and recommendations...
...One approach is to make the PSRs available as a sealed and non-public documents. A public version could then be produced in redacted form. Senators could see the original and the redacted material to guarantee that redactions are performed appropriately.
I didn’t know that was going on. Aren’t lives at risk with soft on crime judges?
Wow…what a mess, Gran.
She should be disqualified, if they aren’t going to release the records.
Turbin can twist off.