Current:Home > MyHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -FinanceAcademy
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-19 02:24:07
The Supreme Court decided 6-3 and 6-2 that race-conscious admission policies of the University of North Carolina and Harvard College violate the Constitution, effectively bringing to an end to affirmative action in higher education through a decision that will reverberate across campuses nationwide.
The rulings fell along ideological lines. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for both cases, and Justice Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh wrote concurring opinions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has ties to Harvard and recused herself in that case, but wrote a dissent in the North Carolina case.
The ruling is the latest from the Supreme Court's conservative majority that has upended decades of precedent, including overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022.
- Read the full text of the decision
Here's how the justices split on the affirmative action cases:
Supreme Court justices who voted against affirmative action
The court's six conservatives formed the majority in each cases. Roberts' opinion was joined by Thomas, Samuel Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The chief justice wrote that Harvard and UNC's race-based admission guidelines "cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause."
"Respondents' race-based admissions systems also fail to comply with the Equal Protection Clause's twin commands that race may never be used as a 'negative' and that it may not operate as a stereotype," Roberts wrote. "The First Circuit found that Harvard's consideration of race has resulted in fewer admissions of Asian-American students. Respondents' assertion that race is never a negative factor in their admissions programs cannot withstand scrutiny. College admissions are zerosum, and a benefit provided to some applicants but not to others necessarily advantages the former at the expense of the latter. "
Roberts said that prospective students should be evaluated "as an individual — not on the basis of race," although universities can still consider "an applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise."
Supreme Court justices who voted to uphold affirmative action
The court's three liberals all opposed the majority's decision to reject race as a factor in college admissions. Sotomayor's dissent was joined by Justice Elena Kagan in both cases, and by Jackson in the UNC case. Both Sotomayor and Kagan signed onto Jackson's dissent as well.
Sotomayor argued that the admissions processes are lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
"The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment enshrines a guarantee of racial equality," Sotomayor wrote. "The Court long ago concluded that this guarantee can be enforced through race-conscious means in a society that is not, and has never been, colorblind."
In her dissent in the North Carolina case, Jackson recounted the long history of discrimination in the U.S. and took aim at the majority's ruling.
"With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces 'colorblindness for all' by legal fiat," Jackson wrote. "But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life."
Melissa Quinn contributed to this report.
- In:
- Affirmative Action
- Supreme Court of the United States
veryGood! (883)
Related
- In ‘Nickel Boys,’ striving for a new way to see
- How high can Simone Biles jump? The answer may surprise you
- Olympic female boxers are being attacked. Let's just slow down and look at the facts
- 14-month-old boy rescued after falling down narrow pipe in the yard of his Kansas home
- Toyota to invest $922 million to build a new paint facility at its Kentucky complex
- Protecting against floods, or a government-mandated retreat from the shore? New Jersey rules debated
- Honolulu Police Department releases body camera footage in only a fraction of deadly encounters
- Lee Kiefer and Lauren Scruggs lead U.S. women to fencing gold in team foil at Paris Olympics
- Trump wants to turn the clock on daylight saving time
- No. 1 Iga Swiatek falls to Qinwen Zheng at the Olympics. Queen has shot at gold
Ranking
- Krispy Kreme offers a free dozen Grinch green doughnuts: When to get the deal
- Facing rollbacks, criminal justice reformers argue policies make people safer
- What is August's birthstone? There's actually three. Get to know the month's gems.
- Donald Trump’s gag order remains in effect after hush money conviction, New York appeals court rules
- See you latte: Starbucks plans to cut 30% of its menu
- ‘He had everyone fooled': Former FBI agent sentenced to life for child rape in Alabama
- Say Goodbye to Frizzy Hair: I Tested and Loved These Products, but There Was a Clear Winner
- Cardi B files for divorce from Offset, posts she’s pregnant with their third child on Instagram
Recommendation
The company planning a successor to Concorde makes its first supersonic test
Marketing firm fined $40,000 for 2022 GOP mailers in New Hampshire
Obama and Bush join effort to mark America’s 250th anniversary in a time of political polarization
Proposed rule would ban airlines from charging parents to sit with their children
Stamford Road collision sends motorcyclist flying; driver arrested
Save 50% on Miranda Kerr's Kora Organics, 70% on Banana Republic, 50% on Le Creuset & Today's Top Deals
Pennsylvania’s long-running dispute over dates on mail-in voting ballots is back in the courts
2024 Olympics: Snoop Dogg Is Team USA’s Biggest Fan With His Medal-Worthy Commentary