Whoopi Goldberg Called Out For Lying About Clarence Thomas, Check Her Response

Whoopi Goldberg, co-host of the horrifically awful liberal echo chamber known as “The View,” decided to spew forth a bunch of lies as she made the assertion that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has made a call for ending interracial marriage.



Now, I don’t know when, if ever, Goldberg has undergone some sort of cognitive ability test, but she might want to consider one now, because it would be utterly ridiculous for Thomas to call for an end to interracial marriage seeing as his own wife is white.

Anyway, TheBlaze is reporting that despite receiving pushback from the other co-hosts of the program, Goldberg continues to stubbornly insist that Thomas “brought up” stripping people of the right to marry someone who is of a different race or ethnicity within his concurring opinion for the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision.

Goldberg made the strange and downright idiotic statements during a chat concerning the Democratic message the party will push for the midterm elections this fall after the overturning of Roe v. Wade ended the false belief that there was a constitutional right to abortion.

“What the Democrats seem to be running on is also protecting everyone’s rights,” Goldberg went on to say during the show. “Regardless, whoever you love or whoever you’re married to, if you’re married — I don’t know — but they’re trying to make sure that the rights you are so easily, you know, able to give away … we’re trying to hold on and say, actually you can’t do that. Especially for a lot of folks who are also married interracially, which is coming up, you know bobbing its ugly head around.”

At this point, fellow co-host Joy Behar interrupted, noting that Thomas, a black man married to a white woman, “is not gonna move on that one.”

"*" indicates required fields

Do you believe the FBI was planting evidence during the Mar-A-Lago raid?*
This poll subscribes you to our premium network of content. Unsubscribe at any time.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

“Well, let’s find out. He’s the one who sort of brought it up,” Goldberg responded.

“Well, he didn’t bring that one up,” Behar replied, but Goldberg went on to insist “yes he did!”

Check out a few more details about the exchange between the hosts via TheBlaze report:

Sunny Hostin, a lawyer, went to Thomas’ concurring opinion for Dobbs to clear up what he actually said. The justice agreed with the majority’s argument that Roe was wrongly decided because the text of the Constitution is silent on abortion and the right is neither “deeply rooted” in the nation’s history nor an essential component of “ordered liberty.” But while the majority explicitly stated, “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion,” Thomas would have gone further.

He wrote that the court should “in future cases … reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.” The cases Thomas cited established a constitutional right to privacy that broadly protects contraception access, sodomy, and gay marriage, respectively.

Importantly, Thomas did not write that these cases were wrongly decided. He took issue with the legal principle of substantive due process, which has been used by courts to establish protections for rights that are not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. Thomas called this principle “an oxymoron” that “lack[s] any basis in the Constitution,” and said the reasoning of the cited cases should be reconsidered using other legal principles.

Hostin didn’t bother to bring up Thomas’ argument concerning substantive due process; however, she did note that the justice did not suggest any sort of reconsideration for Loving v. Virginia, which is the landmark civil rights case that declared any laws banning interracial marriage to be unconstitutional.

And yet, despite all of that, Goldberg continued to make herself look like a complete and total fool. I know she does this on a daily basis, but this time it’s worse than usual.

“I’m telling you, when he spoke about all the things that could go, this was one of the things he brought up,” the co-host wrongly persisted.



After they returned from a commercial break, Goldberg actually doubled-down on her statement.

“This is what Clarence said, he said is concurring opinion is ‘we should reconsider all of the court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold” … and then he went on to name them,” Goldberg continued. “When you say ‘all’, I think you’re talking about ‘all’ and you’re not playing.”

Notice: This article may contain commentary that reflects the author's opinion.