Skip to main content
We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here.

Judge Jeanine Slams Brittney Griner Victim Narrative: “She Knows What the Laws are in Russia”


There have been plenty of hot takes on Brittney Griner‘s nine-year sentence to jail in Russia after she was arrested for having cannabis on her at an airport back in February.

Many are calling Griner a victim of injustice, or even a political prisoner.

Judge Jeanine Pirro has a different perspective though.

She spoke about Griner’s sentence on the Fox News show, ‘The Five,’ where she claimed that Griner was not a political prisoner at all.

“She’s been going to Russia since 2014, right? Playing basketball there, making a million dollars or whatever she makes.” Pirro exclaimed.

“She knows what the laws are in Russia.”

Judge Jeanine then pointed out that Griner admitted that the vape which contained cannabis and hashish oil was indeed hers.

When asked for clarification about what she was saying about the situation, Jeanine criticized Griner further for her choice not to partake in the US National Anthem:

“Let’s just take off the table the woman who hates the national anthem, who probably is not going to hear it for the next nine years if she’s over there.”

harsh words from Judge Jeanine, but is she right or wrong here?

Judge Jeanine’s comments have angered many people who claim she’s being ‘nasty’ or ‘mean.’

Just look at these headlines claiming that she’s celebrating the sentence:

Media Matters provided a transcript of Judge Jeanine’s comments:

Let’s talk about Brittney Griner. I’m tired of everyone saying she’s a hostage and she’s a political prisoner and all this stuff. She’s been going to Russia since 2014, right? Playing basketball there, making a million dollars or whatever she makes. And she knows what the laws are in Russia. She’s got a vape with cannabis and hashish oil in the vape. She doesn’t deny that it’s hers, she doesn’t deny that she packed it, she just says, I was in a rush. She had a trial, she was supposed to testify at the trial. The trial started on July 1st, July 7th she was supposed to testify. She chose not to testify and instead had a friend, I think, give character testimony. And instead of testifying, she then decided to plead guilty. So let’s just take off the table that this is improper what has happened to her.


While some in the media may think she is being too harsh here, other believe that she made some good points:


Join the conversation!

Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!

Hey, Noah here!

Wondering where we went?

Read this and bookmark our new site!

See you over there!

Thanks for sharing!