There’s a certain expectation—however low—that someone who spends every weekday morning opining on the biggest political issues of the day might know where to actually read those issues firsthand. But if you thought Whoopi Goldberg, the longtime lead voice on The View, could direct the public to where they might find a Supreme Court opinion, you’d be mistaken.
In a recent segment, Goldberg fumbled over how to explain a Supreme Court ruling, offering a generic and confused take that sounded more like a party memo than an informed opinion. Why? Because it probably was a party memo. Whoopi doesn’t analyze rulings—she recites talking points. And unfortunately, she’s far from alone in doing so.
WATCH: Whoopi Goldberg asks Justice Sotomayor where “regular folks” can find Supreme Court opinions.
Goldberg: “Where can people find these dissents, because I think people always think they’re not available to regular folks? Is there a place…?
Justice Sotomayor: “Online.” pic.twitter.com/rdfLTXIt04
— Conservative War Machine (@WarMachineRR) September 9, 2025
For years now, The View has operated less like a news commentary show and more like a stage-managed echo chamber for the DNC’s daily messaging. It’s not just bias; it’s laziness. When Goldberg speaks on judicial matters, it’s painfully obvious she hasn’t read the decisions, hasn’t looked up the legal reasoning, and hasn’t even glanced at a dissent or concurrence. She’s relying on whatever filtered summary makes its way onto the white sheet of paper handed to her before the cameras roll. The result? A wildly misinformed audience that walks away thinking they’ve been “informed.”
The irony is, it’s never been easier for average Americans to access the raw materials of government—Supreme Court opinions, oral arguments, dissents, even live coverage of key hearings. A basic Google search, a trip to SCOTUSblog, or a scroll through the court’s own website gives you everything you need. But on The View, we’re supposed to believe that five minutes of Whoopi paraphrasing a paraphrase of an MSNBC segment constitutes “political commentary.”
This is framed by Whoopi in such a way that suggests she’s never read one opinion she’s opined on, but if we give her the benefit of the doubt, it IS good for people to read opinions. SCOTUS judges are generally good writers & View watchers will learn things, but not from Whoopi. https://t.co/LgyfTiej0R
— Mary Katharine Ham (@mkhammer) September 10, 2025
And yet, she and her co-hosts are treated by many in the media as trusted voices of the everyday woman, despite living in a hyper-filtered, ideologically fortified bubble. The truth is, The View is less a source of insight than it is a vehicle for pre-packaged outrage and applause-line activism. It’s infotainment for those who want to feel politically engaged without ever encountering a dissenting view—or even a basic fact check.
As for Justice Sonia Sotomayor—yes, “Judge Sonia,” as Whoopi affectionately calls her—she knows exactly how powerful her words are in these echo chambers. She speaks, and it gets filtered down to the set of The View, where it’s repackaged into emotional soundbites and passed along without scrutiny.
Whoopi didn’t know? Regular folks know where to find them. We do not need to be spoon feed and we also know not to trust the media or shows like the View https://t.co/40QIjKsNvF
— Edie (@011349) September 10, 2025
