Image 01 Image 03

Biden White House Attacks Supreme Court, Bizarrely Claiming Affirmative Action Is a ‘Constitutional Right’

Biden White House Attacks Supreme Court, Bizarrely Claiming Affirmative Action Is a ‘Constitutional Right’

“Now you fast-forward to what we saw last week, affirmative action. Again, taking away important constitutional rights that have been in place for a long time.”

In terms of Supreme Court decisions, the past year has been an abysmal one for Democrats, especially the current Oval Office occupant Joe Biden.

There was, of course, the SCOTUS’ decision in June 2022 to overturn Roe v. Wade. And last month, there was their ruling that race-based college admissions were unconstitutional, their upholding of religious rights in the 303 Creative case, and their striking down of Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness program. There was also their ruling in May that effectively reined in Biden’s EPA.

Not surprisingly, the Biden White House has, like their allies in Congress, the mainstream media, the activist left, and academia, ramped up its attacks on the Supreme Court in the aftermath of the barrage of setbacks for the “progressive” agenda despite over two years of lecturing the American people on how we must respect our democratic norms and sacred institutions, with the clear insinuation that even the mildest criticisms of any of that amounted to being insurrectiony.

Most recently, Biden’s press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, appeared on Ari Melber’s program on MSNBC, where one of the topics under discussion were some of those Supreme Court decisions as well as the political tilt of our nation’s highest court. During the interview, we learned that according to the Biden White House, there is a “constitutional right” to affirmative action:

“This is really, really important and I know the American people are really tracking this, as they should be. Dobbs decision, that was something that was decided on a year ago. Really took away the freedoms from women. I think about abortion, I think about reproductive rights. And that was unprecedented. Now you fast-forward to what we saw last week, affirmative action. Again, taking away important constitutional rights that have been in place for a long time,” Jean-Pierre said.

Also in the below clip, we were assured that Joe Biden is an “expert” in these matters since he once chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee back when he was a senator:

“Let’s not forget the president, when he was a senator, he was the chair of the judiciary committee, he is an expert on this, he understands how this works. A lot of these unprecedented decisions that this SCOTUS has made, they have been held up in the past by Republicans, by Democrats, right? And so there’s so much changes [sic] that have happened in the past year. It is, you know, unheard of. It is really wrong what we’ve seen,” she continued.


Later, Jean-Pierre told Melber that the Biden team was already looking for ways around the Supreme Court’s ruling on the student loan forgiveness program, which was reminiscent of DOJ Attorney General Merrick Garland promising in June 2022 to, as Professor Jacobson put it at the time, “use their vast resources to limit the effect of the Supreme Court’s rulings. They are going all insurrectiony, but legally, of course.”

If there’s one thing Jean-Pierre got right on that, it’s that Joe Biden is indeed an expert: at both undermining the judiciary branch when it suits his purposes and at smearing judges who don’t toe the liberal line. That’s something the late Judge Robert Bork, if he were still with us, could attest to, and it is something that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who was vilified by then-Sen. Judiciary Committee Chairman Joe Biden in 1991, has attested to very recently.

“One of the things you do in hearings is you have to sit there and look attentively at people you know have no idea what they’re talking about,” Justice Thomas, from the movie Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words.

— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


rabid wombat | July 9, 2023 at 4:06 pm

Where they get all their…electricity, money, ideas….out of thin air!

LeftWingLock | July 9, 2023 at 4:07 pm

I haven’t read it in a while but I believe “affirmative action is mentioned in the penumbra to the dicta in one of the concurring opinions in Marbury v. Madison.

Sideshow Bob makes more sense.

For once KJP speaks of something she actually knows about!

If it weren’t for Affirmative Action, this bobblehead would be reading the weather report at some two-bit local TV station.

It must seem that way, that ‘constitutional rights’ are being stripped, when that’s what you mistakenly believed and have had 5+ decades of Supreme Court precedent overturned. The flip side, which d/prog don’t mention, is the initial rulings/opinions that carved out these ‘rights’ by judicial fiat were deeply contested at the time and created just as much of a disruption into the status quo.

These d/prog are PO b/c Trump + GoP Senate was able to put three reasonable Justices onto the CT. We took away their toy or more accurately reclaimed our toy. They had grown dependent upon SCOTUS taking through massive policy changes which they could get passed into law in the normal legislative process b/c the policies were too extreme. Live by SCOTUS ruling and die by them.

This is a major reason we must support whomever emerges as the GoP nominee. We can’t risk losing control of SCOTUS to a majority composed of Kagan, Sotomayor, Jackson and two clones. Lord help us if something happens to Thomas and Alito before we have a GoP Senate majority and a GoP POTUS. If we blow up the ’24 general election b/c ‘our candidate’ wasn’t the nominee and stay home then we risk handing Biden two SCOTUS nominations. No majority on SCOTUS and no Dobbs, no Bruen and no WV v EPA decisions that went our way.

    Mauiobserver in reply to CommoChief. | July 9, 2023 at 6:35 pm

    Very true another 4 or 8 years of a Democrat President could transform this nation from a Republic founded on the principal of individual rights into a globalist entity where rights are prioritized by group identity determined by the permanent administrative bureaucrats.

    It might be very difficult to achieve if Trump is the candidate for the Gop which appears very likely. The establishment GOP led by the Bush NE liberal elites are much closer to the Biden agenda than a populist America first agenda. A good example of that is when it was exposed that Barr sat on the info that the FBI had evidence that Biden was compromised by foreign bribes for policy actions and did disclose to the public prior to the election. Of course Barr’s DOJ did not open a single investigation into election integrity issues in the 2020 election but determined there was nothing to see without even looking.

    Prior to the FBI report being made public Barr was trotted out to speak on behalf of the GOPe and DOJ against Trump and the great unenlightened masses that oppose a globalist agenda for the US. In recent days the elites have sent out Holder as the replacement to attack the Supreme Court for upholding the constitution vs. the progressive legal juggernaut.

    It is interesting how often Obama and GWB are shown together in photographs supporting their joint efforts in various programs but never any of the Bushes with Trump. Both Obama and Trump have been political opponents of the Bush clan but only Trump has major policy disagreements primarily supporting our sovereignty by securing our borders and not engaging or supporting foreign wars that have nothing to do with American defense or even major interests.

    Perhaps the solution is for RFK to run as an independent to allow the never Trumpers an alternative to supporting the Democrat nominee.

      CommoChief in reply to Mauiobserver. | July 9, 2023 at 9:45 pm

      A vote in ’24 for anyone other than the GoP nominee by a center/right voter or that same refusing to cast a ballot is helping create a d/prog victory and potentially to swing SCOTUS leftward with two nominations.

      IMO this next election is as simple as it gets. All the competition, vitriol and bitching among ourselves on the center/ right pales in comparison to the damage a d/prog being inaugurated in Jan ’25 will hold for the Nation. We must unite after the primary and stand together against those who wish our Nation harm. If we selfishly and arrogantly refuse then I don’t want to hear any bitching and moaning out of those who failed to put the interests of the Nation and its future above their own petty ego driven BS.

        Mauiobserver in reply to CommoChief. | July 9, 2023 at 11:18 pm

        I agree with your conclusion but just don’t see the GOP and conservatives rallying behind a candidate.

        I think the populist middle class and working class will support Trump in huge numbers but can’t see the Romney/Ryan bunch going along.

        I think the best hope is either for an RFK type 3rd party to split the Democrat vote or for Biden to be so unpalatable to non woke Dems that they just sit the election out.

        Tucker spoke this week about his interview of the former capital police chief Sund and his statements about the numerous Gov agents in the J6 event. That interview was not shown as Fox fired him just before it was aired. Perhaps if it is clearly shown by Tucker and the House committee that J6 was not an insurrection but a protest against obvious election integrity violations (obviously there was some violence which is not acceptable but perhaps not totally attributable to Trump supporters) then perhaps some of the GOPe voters will vote for Trump. Tucker said he would interview him again and air it on his new site.

          CommoChief in reply to Mauiobserver. | July 10, 2023 at 8:38 am

          What matters is where these votes are located not the National aggregate number. Trump didn’t win the popular vote in ’16 or ’20.

          The last GoP nominee to win the popular vote nationwide was Bush in ’04 at 50.07%, it should be remembered that Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 to Gore. Prior to ’04 we gotta go back to ’88 and his Father to find a popular vote winner for the GoP.

          The GoP nominee winning the popular vote twice in 32 years but taking the Presidency 4/8 cycles with the ’24 election looming seems to me to demonstrate that what counts is winning the swing States while retaining the States favorable to the candidate. Without the swing States and their electoral college count we lose.

          gonzotx in reply to Mauiobserver. | July 10, 2023 at 1:00 pm

          I saw tuckers interview with Russell

          He was playing both sides, actually said he wasn’t political

          Has no idea why he was fired ( lol)

          And LOVES him some RFK Jr

          RFK Jr is right on drugs/Fauci and absolutely wrong on everything else, he will take your guns, he will put wind mills in YOUR front yard, he will , as his recent 3 part Twitter comment, do everything to instill affirmative action as law of the land, he also was invited to Moms for Liberty and LIED when he cancelled

          Changed his story 3 times amd finally landed on, oh their are anti gay

          The Board of MFL have 2 lesbians on it amd one is married to another woman so
          He LIED amd he personally accepted the invite on the ohh one with a board meme er amd lied about that

          He want es the l FW sick vote at any cost


          Everyone is still in love with Camelot, including Tucker

          Who WRONGLY stated in that famous interview that Prest Trump holds some responsibility for the “violence” on Jan 6!

          Really Tucker? Did I not hear President Trump tell the protesters to go peacefully to protest?

          Did he not ask for 10,000 troops to be stationed I DC?

          Amd was denied by Pelosi and co?

          Did not the FBI infiltrate the protests, tear down fencing, incite others?

          Did not the police FIRST SHOOT into the peaceful crowd of grandfathers, grandmothers and ex military rubber bullets, smoke bombs and other crap?

          Did not the crowd see the Capital police beat to DEATH Ms Borland? And react to THAT?

          WTF Tucker

          I had a smudge of faith I. Tucker, thought he had been red pilled, it’s a process, but no

          He still wants to be loved by the upper class, which he is very much a part of

          By the way, about Florida?

          This one’s for you, but they are trying to keep President Trump off the ballot there, can’t be losing you down state can you gov?

        M Poppins in reply to CommoChief. | July 10, 2023 at 12:36 pm


          CommoChief in reply to M Poppins. | July 10, 2023 at 10:17 pm

          There’s plenty of wishy washy people, you probably know some. These folks don’t like being forced into taking sides or a strong position and risk ‘offending’ some overly sensitive woke weirdo and that’s the political center, aka ‘swing voters’.

E Howard Hunt | July 9, 2023 at 4:30 pm

Nothin to worry bouts, honey-chile. You gots Action Jackson on the court to write dissents in rainbow colors with her crayons.

Karine Jean-Pierre claims the constitution is made out of rubber and can be twisted to mean anything they want it to mean. However, it is only the executive branch that has the right to do this.

The US government consists of an executive branch with two lower sub-branches under it:

a. judicial sub-branch
b. legislative sub-branch

    CommoChief in reply to Peabody. | July 9, 2023 at 5:16 pm

    Incorrect, each branch is paramount within the sphere of powers delegated to it by ‘we the people’ within our Constitution. Even if that weren’t the case the dominant branch would be Congress certainly not the Executive or the Judiciary. That’s why the founders set it up this way after their successful rebellion in throwing off a King who misused the sort of powers you seem to imply were granted to the Executive.

Oh well, so much for Defending the Constitution
He has been taken over by the Marxists

In the dialogue between Brandeis and Marshall about the needed ending of affirmative action… the present court sided with Brandeis and pulled the plug on AA after a few decades. This was a dialogue about decades versus centuries. Any “right” that has a “sell by date” isn’t a right. Marshall wanted centuries of AA as if that would finally correct the issue. His two wrongs equal a right was and never is correct.

It must be a very special right in that it turns up to be a duty.

Reading the book recommended here by Mathew Lohmeier Irresistible Revolution, well past 1/2 and its frightening how the Cultural Marxists are taking over the military. For years the consensus was the military wouldn’t be used against the civilian population, but take a brainwashed, and that’s what they are doing, military and who can be sure they won’t march against “White Supremacists “?

I usually give Ms. Jean-Pierre the benefit of the doubt, realizing that she has to tow the administration line. However, on this the stupidity meter is pegged.

Is she suggesting that discrimination against asians in a Constitutional Right?

Some reporter should ask her if the administrations view is that Asian Americans should only be counted as 3/5ths of a person in the next census.

I have no doubt that three sitting Supreme Court justices would agree.

Bruce Hayden | July 10, 2023 at 12:39 am

“This is really, really important and I know the American people are really tracking this, as they should be. Dobbs decision, that was something that was decided on a year ago. Really took away the freedoms from women. I think about abortion, I think about reproductive rights. And that was unprecedented. Now you fast-forward to what we saw last week, affirmative action. Again, taking away important constitutional rights that have been in place for a long time,” Jean-Pierre said.

Affirmative Action was an important constitutional right? Since when? The important constitutional right is Equal Protection, and AA at those two schools violated EP for the plaintiffs. The best that could be said was that 23 years ago, Justice O’Connor gave AA 25 years as an exception to EP. It was pretty much over.

    henrybowman in reply to Bruce Hayden. | July 11, 2023 at 3:28 am

    “Affirmative Action was an important constitutional right? Since when?”
    I think it’s unreasonable for us to expect Karinge Gom Jabbar to know what she’s talking about.
    Is this “soft bigotry?” No, it’s a fully-justified assessment based on her public history.

Capitalist-Dad | July 10, 2023 at 8:08 am

A “right” to racial discrimination? The Democrats tried this scam before, when they invented Popular Sovereignty—the bizarre notion that a Democrat majority could vote to impose slavery on blacks.

Steven Brizel | July 10, 2023 at 8:41 am

There is and never has been such a constitutuional right, rather a judicially created remedy of dubious origins and rationale

thalesofmiletus | July 10, 2023 at 9:01 am

It’s not bizarre — they genuinely believe the CRA is the new constitution. We basically have two faction in this country with two different constitutions.

Like being lectured by a 15-year-old girl.

There was also their ruling in May that effectively reined in Biden’s EPA.
Which Joe Manchin gave back to the EPA in The Anti-Inflation Act.

Jean-Pierre on the podium is a perfect example of the reality of affirmation action proving that affirmative action is a lifetime crutch and a clear and present danger to the future of black Americans. To think that some people on the planet want monetary reparations from people who were never slave owners paid to people who were never slaves is indicative of the ignorance that slavery was practiced in Africa for hundreds of years prior to the discovery of America and that the slaves brought to America were captured and sold by their own African countrymen to the slavers.

This is nothing new for the so-called ‘Progressive’, aka Social Democrats, aka socialists all of which, along with others, are nothing more than euphemisms for communists. Frank D. Roosevelt tried to invent for new ‘rights’ with his ‘Four Freedoms’ speech. This is what they do. They can’t convince enough of the populace, let alone enough members of 38 state legislatures to AMEND the Constitution in accordance with the procedure to do so outlined in that hallowed document so they ALWAYS default to some version o their standard tactic: Direct Action; be that ginning up unrest or burning American cities, businesses and home to the ground or outright murder and assassination. That is the Modern Democrat Party. It’s not what they DO; It’s WHO THEY ARE.

I have read over and over my U.S. constitution and cannot find in it anywhere the term “affirmative action”. How much sharper the eyes of the press secretary must be than mine to find those very words in our constitution. Perhaps she is reading some other country’s constitution? Dobbs did not itself limit abortions, it eliminated the federal national standard of viability and turned the question back to the states. Some of them, blue states, have expanded abortion rights while others have limited them. SCOTUS itself has not made those policy decisions. Finally, although the President, like anyone else is allowed to have a personal opinion of what is a constitutional right, in the legal determination of what is a constitutional right the only opinion that is binding is that of SCOTUS.