Current:Home > reviewsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Secure Growth Solutions
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
Indexbit View
Date:2025-04-11 04:36:35
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! (7)
Related
- A South Texas lawmaker’s 15
- The 10 Best Backless Bras That Stay Hidden and *Actually* Give You Support
- Love Is Blind's Cameron Hamilton Reveals Why He and Lauren Weren't at the Season 6 Reunion
- When is the Boston St. Patrick's Day parade? 2024 route, time, how to watch and stream
- The Daily Money: Spending more on holiday travel?
- US to investigate Texas fatal crash that may have involved Ford partially automated driving system
- Dr. Dre Shares He Suffered 3 Strokes After 2021 Brain Aneurysm
- PETA tells WH, Jill Biden annual Easter Egg Roll can still be 'egg-citing' with potatoes
- Former longtime South Carolina congressman John Spratt dies at 82
- Jimmy Garoppolo signs one-year contract with Los Angeles Rams, per reports
Ranking
- Travis Hunter, the 2
- A Gas Tanker Crashed in Birmingham and Spilled 2,100 Gallons Into Nearby Village Creek. Who Is Responsible?
- Alec Baldwin seeks dismissal of grand jury indictment in fatal shooting of cinematographer
- A fourth Albuquerque, New Mexico, police officer has resigned amid probe of unit
- Intel's stock did something it hasn't done since 2022
- McDonald's experiences tech outages worldwide, impacting some restaurants
- After the pandemic, young Chinese again want to study abroad, just not so much in the US
- Steelers trade QB Kenny Pickett to Eagles, clearing way for Russell Wilson to start, per reports
Recommendation
What were Tom Selleck's juicy final 'Blue Bloods' words in Reagan family
Michigan suspends defensive line coach Gregg Scruggs following drunk driving arrest
The deceptive math of credit card rewards: Spending for points doesn't always make sense
Savannah Chrisley Shares Parents Todd and Julie's Brutally Honest Reaction to Masked Singer Gig
A South Texas lawmaker’s 15
After the pandemic, young Chinese again want to study abroad, just not so much in the US
Get Your Carts Ready! Free People’s Sale Is Heating Up, With Deals of up to 95% Off
Internet gambling revenue continues to soar in New Jersey. In-person revenue? Not so much.