Whoopi Goldberg Has Full Meltdown Over Supreme Court’s Affirmative Action Ruling

Whoopi Goldberg
Source: Screenshot Twitter Video

Earlier today, we reported that the Supreme Court ruled affirmative action programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina were unconstitutional. Minutes after the decision was made public, Whoopi Goldberg had a full meltdown on her ABC talk show “The View.”

Goldberg Throws Temper Tantrum

TV Line reported that “The View” went live just a few minutes after the Supreme Court’s decision was revealed. Goldberg immediately lost it over the ruling, focusing her fury on the conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

“He doesn’t know what diversity is. That’s what he said, and so he doesn’t get it,” Goldberg, 67, said of Thomas, 75. “Well, let me pose this question to you, Justice Thomas: Could your mother and father vote in this country? Because had the 14th Amendment actually had us on equal footing, they would’ve been able to vote. And you know why that changed? Because people got out and made a change. If we didn’t have to, no one would do it.”

“Who wants to get hit by water from a water hose? Nobody!” she continued. “But that’s what people did in order to get the vote. So when you say you don’t know what diversity is, I say you’re full of it.”

Earlier in this segment, Goldberg tried to argue that affirmative action is important.

“The 14th Amendment is supposed to promise equal protection, but if everyone was actually treated equally, we wouldn’t have had to put in affirmative action,” she said. “People wouldn’t have had to march, and begged, and gotten hosed, and all of these things that people did to just balance us out with everything else going on in the country.”

Check out the full segment in the video below.

Related: Trump Celebrates ‘End of Racist College Admissions’ After Supreme Court Rules Affirmative Action is Unconstitutional

Supreme Court’s Ruling

Unfortunately for Goldberg and her fellow woke liberals, however, there’s nothing that they can do to bring their beloved affirmative action back. In these landmark rulings, the Supreme Court ruled that Harvard and UNC’s admissions programs violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The vote was 6-3 in the UNC case and 6-2 in the Harvard case, as Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson had to recuse herself in the latter because she served on the board of overseers at Harvard. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Elena Kagan, both appointed by Barack Obama, each dissented in the two cases.

“Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points,” Roberts wrote in the decision, according to ABC News. “We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today.”

Related: Whoopi Goldberg Takes Shot At Judge Jeanine Pirro Years After Their Epic Fight

Roberts Doubles Down

“At the same time, as all parties agree, nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise,” he continued, going on to say that the court has “permitted race-based admissions only within the confines of narrow restrictions. University programs must comply with strict scrutiny, they may never use race as a stereotype or negative, and — at some point — they must end.”

Goldberg can whine about the decision all she wants to, but it comes as a huge relief to the millions of Americans who have been negatively  impacted by affirmative action for decades. Finally, the next generation of young Americans will be admitted to college based on merit, rather than on race.

This truly is a momentous day for America!

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The Political Insider's Culture Beat covers social and cultural events that are shaped, at least in part, by politics.

Mentioned in this article::