With Harmeet K. Dhillon perhaps in line to succeed Pam Bondi as U.S. Attorney General, it's time for POLITICO to come out with a hit piece about the "online right" cheering her spending a year "trying to turn the Justice Department in the opposite direction." That's a good thing, because it was headed in the wrong direction.
Meet the woman who thinks civil rights went too far.
— POLITICO (@politico) April 6, 2026
Harmeet Dhillon has spent a year trying to turn the Justice Department in the opposite direction. Now the online right wants to see her as attorney general.https://t.co/RY5x9xkUkG
Brit Hume says the piece is not nearly as biased and inaccurate as the headline would have you believe.
This article is not nearly as biased and inaccurate as the headline makes it sound. She has never said any such thing, but count on Politico to poison its own piece. https://t.co/2FLeMuFrN8
— Brit Hume (@brithume) April 6, 2026
When do we get to the part where she said that civil rights had gone "too far"? Dustin Gardiner reports:
Over the last year, she dropped federal oversight of police departments accused of discrimination that was once a staple of the Civil Rights Division’s work. An office that helped defend affirmative action is now investigating universities to snuff it out. Dhillon’s staff is now suing states to acquire voter databases in what activists call an effort to disenfranchise minority voters whose ballot access her office once went to court to defend.
Those who have witnessed Dhillon’s rise in California argue the lone-wolf contrarianism she showed there makes her a perfect candidate to help lead a department that Trump has come to treat as something of a personal law office.
Speaking of snuffing out affirmative action in university admissions, one of the first moves Joe Biden made as president was to drop the government's lawsuit against Yale for discriminating against whites and Asians. And how would it disenfranchise minority voters to acquire voter databases? C'mon, man.
Really weak.
— JWF (@JammieWF) April 7, 2026
This is slanderous. Harmeet Dhillon is not trying to disenfranchise minority voters.
— Kristen Mag (@kristenmag) April 6, 2026
She consistently defends the civil rights of all Americans. It’s absurd to imply otherwise.
She also never said that civil rights went too far:
I don’t think civil rights “went too far” — they didn’t go far enough and the DOJ didn’t stand up for ALL Americans. Thanks to @realDonaldTrump and with the support of our DOJ leadership — NOW WE DO!
— AAGHarmeetDhillon (@AAGDhillon) April 6, 2026
As to next steps, I look forward to supporting @DAGToddBlanche as Acting AG!! https://t.co/jLSyabB4s1
What a shitty ass framing. Shame on you, you unhelpful partisan jerkoffs.
— Erich Hartmann (@erichhartmann) April 6, 2026
A rather disgraceful headline, even by Politico’s standards
— Billy Gribbin (@BillyGribbin) April 6, 2026
False.
— Karl Wright (@DaddyWri) April 6, 2026
Dhillon has been rigorous in protecting and enforcing the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It's just that you folks thought you could ignore it.
Well put. Too far is exactly where we were headed. When you start taking away women’s rights in favor of trans rights. And favoring one race over another. She took issue and called it what it is.
— Eric CIAramella’s Dirty Whistle (@TheAndersPaul) April 6, 2026
If civil rights means DEI, discrimination, and prioritization of certain races/classes of people then yes civil rights went too far.
— Red Dot in a Blue Dot in a Red State (@reddotaustintx) April 6, 2026
No.
— Sum guy (@Chi1idip) April 6, 2026
She just believes that civil rights apply to everyone equally regardless of skin color.
And you don’t.
Oh the horror, she believes in equal rights.
— Speaking My Mind (@Speak_my_mind) April 6, 2026
No, she doesn't think that, what a dishonest report. She favors the restoration of civil rights for all, no exceptions.
— Monica Showalter (@mmshowalter1) April 7, 2026
It resulted in systemic discrimination within the vast majority of our institutions.
— Ruettiger (@rruetigger) April 6, 2026
Meet the woman that believes civil rights are universal and should be given equal due process.
— Rick Masters (@ChapChaeMasters) April 6, 2026
Civil rights apply to everyone equally.
— Juanito Bandito (@bandito_juanito) April 6, 2026
Preferential treatment based on skin color, race, religion, or sex is by definition NOT a civil right and is unconstitutional.
It didn’t “go too far” it went backwards.
— Victor Reeeee (@EmTeaVe) April 6, 2026
They invented the nebulous gibberish concept of systemic racism to justify actual systematic racist policies.
Wow, Politico. This is absolutely false.
— News Radio 105.5 WERC (@1055WERC) April 6, 2026
She's moving in the opposite direction because that's how you fix an over-correction.
— Jon DiPietro (@jondipietronh) April 6, 2026
DEI isn’t civil rights.
— ClassicalLiberalGirl (@Thinker_Mom) April 7, 2026
It’s reverse discrimination.
It’s morally wrong, and destructive to our country.
Everything in the Politico byline is intentional dishonesty and lies. Dhillon is suing universities and governments explicitly for their civil rights violations. It is your criminal minds that believe only some people of certain skin color are deserving of civil rights.
— RecursiveReferences (@Recursivelies) April 6, 2026
I'm not the hardline right. I believe @HarmeetKDhillon is an excellent lawyer upholding the Constitution fairly.
— Lisa Levsen (@WineGal8603) April 6, 2026
Stop your propaganda nonsense.
If civil rights "went too far" before, then what exactly are civil rights? Another dishonest headline for all of the haters who won't bother to read the interview.
***