最高法院提名人凯坦吉·布朗·杰克逊法官周二，她在参议院司法委员会接受了近13个小时的质询，为自己的记录辩护，反对共和党精心策划的将其标榜为“对犯罪手软”和自由主义行动主义。她周三早上回来接受另一轮全天质询。

以下是一些要点:

抵制儿童色情判刑索赔

杰克逊首次公开反驳共和党参议员乔希·霍利的指控她有一个“长期记录”,让儿童色情罪犯在危害儿童的判决中“脱身”。

“量刑是法官的自由裁量行为，但这不是数字游戏，”她说。

霍利花了近30分钟仔细审查杰克逊2013年的决定，该决定判处一名18岁因拥有儿童色情制品而被定罪的人三个月监禁——低于检察官要求的两年，也远低于联邦指导方针中的最高10年。

杰克逊称这一罪行“令人发指”和“令人震惊”，并继续解释了她在设计一个“足够但不超过必要”的判决时需要遵循的多方面过程。

“国会不仅赋予法官做出决定的自由裁量权，还要求法官根据个人情况做出决定，”她说，“不仅要考虑指导方针，还要考虑各种因素，包括被告的年龄、被告的情况、犯罪的可怕性质以及对受害者的伤害。”

卡罗琳·卡斯特/美联社

参议员乔希·霍利质疑最高法院提名法官凯坦吉·布朗·杰克逊·杜林...

司法“方法论”，而不是哲学

杰克逊抵制了将她的判例归类为特定“哲学”象征的反复尝试，但她确实描绘了一种为裁决案件而发展的“方法论”。

她列出了接案子时要遵循的三个步骤:首先，“从中立的立场出发;第二，“评估所有的事实”第三，根据案件事实解释和适用法律。

参议员本·萨斯问杰克逊，她最支持哪个历史正义。“如果你必须告诉美国人民谁是你最亲近的人，那些法官是谁?”他问。

"我必须承认，我真的没有一个他们塑造的或者我会塑造的正义，"杰克逊回答。“我拥有的是一份记录。我有570多个案例，在这些案例中，我采用了我描述的方法，并向人们展示了我是如何分析案例的。”

为她被指控的恐怖分子辩护

杰克逊称她的服务为联邦公设辩护人，包括辩护被指控的恐怖分子未经指控而被关押关塔纳摩湾——一个“捍卫代表宪法价值”的行为。

“在我们的制度下，人们有权获得代表权，”她说。“联邦公设辩护律师无权选择他们的客户。这是一种服务。”

杰克逊的服务扩展到私人执业，参议员林赛格雷厄姆在与被提名人的一次戏剧性的交流中仔细检查了这一点。

“是什么让你加入这个案子的?”他追问。“如果这不是你的职位，你为什么要带走客户?”格雷厄姆一直反对为911战争后的在押人员争取释放的努力。

作为她的工作的一部分，杰克逊帮助最高法院提交了一份简报，代表她的客户指控美国政府的待遇“构成战争罪和/或反人类罪。”

约翰·科宁后来指控杰克逊在辩护状中将前总统乔治·w·布什和前国防部长唐纳德·拉姆斯菲尔德称为“战犯”，但文件显示杰克逊并没有提出这样的直接或个人指控。

批判种族理论和法律

作为哈佛法学院的同学，他们是“友好的”,但今天特德·克鲁兹参议员与杰克森发生了激烈的争吵批判种族理论以及它在美国学术界和法律界的地位。

“我没学过批判种族理论，也没用过。杰克逊告诉克鲁兹:“这不是我作为法官的工作内容。

克鲁兹试图让杰克逊解释CRT——一种认为种族主义是美国社会固有的学术理论——以及为什么它会出现在乔治敦走读学校的课程中，她是该学校的董事。

克鲁兹拿着他所说的在私立学校使用的书籍的海报板摘录，敦促杰克逊解决其中包含的信息。"你同意这本书教导孩子们婴儿是种族主义者吗?"他问。

"我不认为应该让任何一个孩子觉得他们是种族主义者，或者他们不被重视，或者他们不被重视，他们是受害者，他们是压迫者，"杰克逊回答说。

热点社会问题:枪支、信仰、堕胎、同性婚姻

每一位现代最高法院的被提名人都被问及他或她对当今一些最热门的社会问题的立场。像她的前任一样，杰克逊小心翼翼地回答，以保持她在未来案件中的公正性。

当被问及第二修正案时，杰克逊说，“最高法院已经确定，个人拥有和携带武器的权利是一项基本权利。”

参议员林赛·格雷厄姆直截了当地问道:“你的信仰是什么?”杰克逊说她是一个无教派的新教基督徒她的信仰在她的生活中“非常重要”。

"从1到10分，你认为自己有多忠诚?"格雷厄姆继续说道。“你多久去一次教堂?”杰克逊拒绝讨论她信仰实践的细节。

当被问及她是否支持“传统”的婚姻观时，杰克逊说:“我知道有各种宗教信仰以传统方式定义婚姻，”她补充道，“正如你所知，这些问题正在被提起诉讼...所以我能说的很有限。”

参议员约翰·肯尼迪问法官她是否知道当生命开始。“我不知道，”杰克逊回答。"我有一个宗教观点，但在裁决案件时我把它放在一边。"在听证会的早些时候，她说罗伊诉韦德案是“既定法律”。

Ketanji Brown Jackson spars with GOP in defense of record

Supreme Court nomineeJudge Ketanji Brown Jacksontook questions for nearly 13 hours before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, defending her record against an orchestrated Republican effort to brand it as "soft on crime" and liberal activism. She returns Wednesday morning for another round of all-day questioning.

Here are some top takeaways:

Pushback on child porn sentencing claims

Jackson mounted her first public rebuttal tocharges by Republican Sen. Josh Hawleythat she has a "long record" of letting child pornography offenders "off the hook" in sentences to the endangerment of children.

"Sentencing is a discretionary act of a judge, but it's not a numbers game," she said.

Hawley spent nearly 30-minutes scrutinizing Jackson's 2013 decision to sentence an 18-year-old convicted of possessing child pornography to three months in prison -- below the two years prosecutors had sought and far short of the up to 10 years in federal guidelines.

Jackson called the crime "heinous" and "egregious," going on to explain the multifaceted process she was required to follow in devising a sentence that was "sufficient but not greater than necessary."

"Congress has given judges not only the discretion to make the decision, but required judges to do so on an individualized basis," she said, "taking into account not only the guidelines but also various factors, including the age of the defendant, the circumstances of the defendant, the terrible nature of the crime, the harm to the victims."

Judicial 'methodology,' not a philosophy

Jackson resisted repeated attempts to classify her jurisprudence as emblematic of a particular "philosophy," but she did delineate a "methodology" developed for deciding cases.

She laid out three steps she follows when receiving a case: first, "proceeding from a position of neutrality;" second, "evaluating all of the facts;" third, interpreting and applying the law to facts in the case.

Sen. Ben Sasse asked Jackson with which historical justice she's most aligned. "If you had to tell the American people who you're closest to, who are those justices?" he asked.

"I must admit that I don't really have a justice they've molded myself after or that I would," Jackson replied. "What I have is a record. I have 570-plus cases in which I have employed the methodology that I described and that shows people how I analyze cases."

Defending her defense of accused terrorists

Jackson called her service as a federal public defender -- including defense ofaccused terrorists held without chargeat Guantanamo Bay -- an act of "standing up for the constitutional value of representation."

"People under our system are entitled to representation," she said. "Federal public defenders don't get to pick their clients. It's a service."

Jackson's service extended into private practice, which Sen. Lindsey Graham scrutinized during a dramatic exchange with the nominee.

"What made you join the case?" he pressed. "If it's not your position, why would you take the client?" Graham has long opposed efforts to win release for detainees from the post-9/11 war.

As part of her work, Jackson helped file a Supreme Court brief alleging on her client's behalf that the U.S. government's treatment "constitute(s) war crimes and/or crimes against humanity."

Sen. John Cornyn later accused Jackson of branding former President George W. Bush and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfed as "war criminals" in the brief, but the documents show no such direct or personal accusation was made.

Critical race theory and the law

They were "friendly" as Harvard Law classmates, but today Sen. Ted Cruz sparred tensely with Jackson overcritical race theoryand its place in American academia and law.

"I've never studied critical race theory, and I've never used it. It doesn't come up in the work that I do as a judge," Jackson told Cruz.

Cruz attempted to get Jackson to explain CRT -- an academic theory that racism is inherent in American society -- and why it has appeared in the curriculum at Georgetown Day School, where she sits on the board.

Armed with poster board excerpts of books he said were used at the private school, Cruz pressed Jackson to address the messages they contained. "Do agree with this book that is being taught to kids that babies are racist?" he asked.

"I do not believe that any child should be made to feel as though they are racist or though they are not valued or though they are less than, that they are victims, that they are oppressors," Jackson replied.

Hot button social issues: Guns, faith, abortion, same-sex marriage

Every modern Supreme Court nominee is asked about his or her position on some of the most hot-button social issues of the day. Jackson, like her predecessors, delicately answered to preserve her impartiality in future cases.

Asked about the Second Amendment, Jackson said, "The Supreme Court has established that the individual right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right."

Sen. Lindsey Graham asked point blank, "What faith are you?" Jackson said she is anondenominational Protestant Christianwhose faith is "very important" in her life.

"On a scale of 1 to 10, how faithful would you say you are?" Graham continued. "How often do you go to church?" Jackson declined to discuss details of her faith practice.

Asked whether she supports a "traditional" view of marriage, Jackson said: "I am aware that there are various religious faiths that define marriage in a traditional way," adding "these issues are being litigated, as you know ... and so I'm limited in what I can say."

Sen. John Kennedy asked the judge if she knowswhen life begins. "I don't know," Jackson replied. "I have a religious view that I set aside when ruling on cases." Earlier in the hearing, she said that Roe vs. Wade was "settled law."