The View' Co-Host Stunned by Rachel Maddow's Outrageous Comment

The View' Co-Host Stunned by Rachel Maddow's Outrageous Comment

One of the co-hosts of ABC’s “The View” appeared taken aback by a comment from guest and far-left MSNBC host Rachel Maddow about some of the conservative-leaning justices on the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The blatant corruption of a couple of these Supreme Court justices is John Roberts’ problem. He is the chief justice; he has to police it to save his court and to save the legal system,” Maddow stated, which seemed to surprise co-host Sunny Hostin, an attorney by profession.

Recently, left-wing media and Democrats have intensified their criticism of Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Thomas has been under scrutiny for not fully reporting gifts such as private flights and other amenities from a wealthy Republican donor, while Alito faced criticism for flying a U.S. flag upside-down at his residence for a time.

Hostin appeared to question Maddow’s assertions, but Maddow stood firm.

“I work at MSNBC. If there was a member of my family lobbying the White House chief of staff, saying, ‘overturn this election result,’ you think they’d let me cover that election result, let alone give a binding judicial ruling on that election result?” Maddow said, referring to Ginni Thomas, who texted then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, urging him to contest then-President Trump’s 2020 election loss.

Maddow also contended that the Supreme Court had essentially already given Trump immunity by delaying proceedings long enough that actions he took in 2020 would not be tried before he could potentially return to the White House.


Historically, Thomas was not required to disclose such gifts according to past rules and standards. He has acknowledged that recent changes to those rules would mandate such disclosures in the future and has vowed to comply. Regarding Alito, he claimed that his wife was responsible for turning the flag upside down, and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.

The View’s co-hosts have shown inconsistency in their criticism; most were praising the Supreme Court when justices preserved access to the abortion medication mifepristone.

“It does restore a little bit of my faith in the court,” Hostin said on Thursday. “Because the legal standard is, do you have standing to bring a case? Can anybody bring a case in front of the Supreme Court? No. You have to prove that you have injuries resulting from it, and so you’ve got a group of doctors and a group of citizens, and all of these people bring this challenge to the FDA and say, we don’t want this pill.”

Co-host Sara Haines remarked that the ruling reminded her to maintain faith in the country’s institutions.

“We focus so much on the hot topics, on the results, rather than the legal reasoning and always call the judges conservative or liberal. It’s about the interpretation of the law, so reminding ourselves to have faith in this judicial [system], especially the Supreme Court, because it’s easy to attack them like regular politicians, but we need to remain faithful in our institutions. That’s why so many of us are scared,” she said.

In his opinion for the court, Justice Brett Kavanaugh acknowledged the challengers’ “sincere legal, moral, ideological, and policy objections” to elective abortion “by others” and to the FDA’s 2016 and 2021 changes to the conditions on the use of the drug. However, he explained that the challengers did not demonstrate that they would be harmed by the FDA’s mifepristone policies.

Under the Constitution, simply objecting to abortion and the FDA’s policies is not sufficient to bring a case in federal court. Kavanaugh suggested that the appropriate venue for these objections is in the political or regulatory arena.

Subscribe to Stand with Trump!

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.