Tim Scott responds to Obamas' criticism of Supreme Court ruling: 'A lie from the pit of hell'

 

Tim Scott responds to Obamas' criticism of Supreme Court ruling: 'A lie from the pit of hell'

The Supreme Court's decision to reject affirmative action in colleges should be praised, according to Sen. Tim Scott, a Republican from South Carolina. The 2024 presidential hopeful also retaliated against former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama on "The Faulkner Focus," who remarked that "my heart breaks" for young people who are "wondering what their future holds" as a result of the decision. Obamas and other left-leaning figures, according to Scott, are spreading lies "from the pit of hell" about opportunities in America.

.Timothy Scott We will have another African-American president, which is excellent news. Tim Scott will be his name. It's January 2025 at this time. I would tell America today that I am energized by who we are as a country.

I'm running for president because I know America can do for anyone what she has done for me. But sending the message that somehow the color of your skin means that you will not be able to achieve your goals from an educational perspective, from an income perspective or family formation, that is a lie from the pit of hell. We will not be judged solely by the color of our skin. That's what the ruling said today. But that is the story of America. That is a story of American progress and we can all celebrate that today. 

Many universities have for too long done just the oppo­site. And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice," the opinion states.

Justice Roberts was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the main dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and in part by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who recused herself from the Harvard case due to her previous role on Harvard's Board of Overseers.

While agreeing with the majority opinion, Justice Thomas wrote a separate concurrence with his own thoughts.  

The decision, he said, "sees the universities’ admissions policies for what they are: rudderless, race-based preferences designed to ensure a particular racial mix in their entering classes. Those policies fly in the face of our colorblind Constitution and our Nation’s equality ideal. In short, they are plainly — and boldly — unconstitutional."

"While I am painfully aware of the social and economic ravages which have befallen my race and all who suffer discrimination, I hold out enduring hope that this country will live up to its principles so clearly enunciated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States: that all men are created equal, are equal citizens, and must be treated equally before the law,"