Current:Home > StocksHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -GrowthInsight
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-15 11:08:09
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! (19746)
Related
- Louvre will undergo expansion and restoration project, Macron says
- US Steel shareholders approve takeover by Japan’s Nippon Steel opposed by Biden administration
- A Nigerian transgender celebrity is jailed for throwing money into the air, a rare conviction
- Rupert Murdoch is selling his triplex penthouse in New York City. See what it looks like.
- The FTC says 'gamified' online job scams by WhatsApp and text on the rise. What to know.
- Golden Bachelor's Gerry Turner and Theresa Nist Break Up 3 Months After Wedding
- California fishermen urge action after salmon fishing is canceled for second year in a row
- What to know about Rashee Rice, Chiefs WR facing charges for role in serious crash
- Intellectuals vs. The Internet
- Thousands of zipline kits sold on Amazon recalled due to fall hazard, 9 injuries reported
Ranking
- NFL Week 15 picks straight up and against spread: Bills, Lions put No. 1 seed hopes on line
- The 3 secrets of 401(k) millionaires
- Kentucky hires Mark Pope of BYU to fill men's basketball coaching vacancy
- US, Japan and South Korea hold drills in disputed sea as Biden hosts leaders of Japan, Philippines
- EU countries double down on a halt to Syrian asylum claims but will not yet send people back
- Julia Fox's Latest Look Includes a Hairy Boob Bra and Closed Vagina Underwear
- Late Johnnie Cochran's firm prays families find 'measure of peace' after O.J. Simpson's death
- Hamas says Israeli airstrike kills 3 sons of the group's political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza
Recommendation
Current, future North Carolina governor’s challenge of power
O.J. Simpson, acquitted murder defendant and football star, dies at age 76
Hundreds of drugs are in short supply around the U.S., pharmacists warn
Teaching refugee women to drive goes farther than their destination
Which apps offer encrypted messaging? How to switch and what to know after feds’ warning
A Trump campaign stop at an Atlanta Chick-fil-A offers a window into his outreach to Black voters
Man charged in slaying after woman’s leg found at Milwaukee-area park
Can You Restore Heat Damaged Hair? Here's What Trichologists Have to Say