Current:Home > NewsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -NextGenWealth
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-15 09:02:54
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! (94)
Related
- Brianna LaPaglia Reveals The Meaning Behind Her "Chickenfry" Nickname
- Aaron Judge undergoes MRI on his abs and gets results. What's next for Yankees' captain?
- David Mixner, LGBTQ+ activist and Bill Clinton campaign advisor, dies at 77
- Prince William Attends Thomas Kingston’s Funeral Amid Kate Middleton Photo Controversy
- Intellectuals vs. The Internet
- Day care provider convicted of causing infant’s death with antihistamine sentenced to 3 to 10 years
- Former Alabama Republican US Rep. Robert Terry Everett dies at 87
- Oscars 2024 red carpet fashion and key moments from Academy Awards arrivals
- Elon Musk's skyrocketing net worth: He's the first person with over $400 billion
- Judge rules missing 5-year-old girl legally dead weeks after father convicted of killing her
Ranking
- Paris Hilton, Nicole Richie return for an 'Encore,' reminisce about 'The Simple Life'
- Nearly naked John Cena presents Oscar for best costume design at 2024 Academy Awards
- Who did the Oscars 2024 In Memoriam include? Full list of those remembered at the Academy Awards
- US lawmakers say TikTok won’t be banned if it finds a new owner. But that’s easier said than done
- Finally, good retirement news! Southwest pilots' plan is a bright spot, experts say
- Jamie Lee Curtis Shares Glimpse at Everything Everywhere All at Once Reunion at 2024 Oscars
- Standout moments from the hearing on the Biden classified documents probe by special counsel Hur
- Did anyone win Powerball? Winning numbers from March 11, 2024 lottery drawing
Recommendation
Retirement planning: 3 crucial moves everyone should make before 2025
Oscars’ strikes tributes highlight solidarity, and the possible labor struggles to come
Buttigieg scolds railroads for not doing more to improve safety since Ohio derailment
Beyoncé's new album will be called ‘Act II: Cowboy Carter’
Toyota to invest $922 million to build a new paint facility at its Kentucky complex
What to know about a settlement that clarifies what’s legal under Florida’s ‘Don’t Say Gay’ law
Dozens hurt by strong movement on jetliner heading from Australia to New Zealand
Trump, in reversal, opposes TikTok ban, calls Facebook enemy of the people